Ask A Woman: Do women judge a man based on his shoes?
If you’ve got a question that needs the female treatment, chances are you’re not the only one who wants to ask it. Beth is our source for the answers. From opinions on men’s style to decoding the sometimes mysterious ways of women, she’ll take on a different question every Thursday. And don’t worry, your identity will be protected too. Click here to get to know Beth, then get in touch with her by sending your question to: askawoman@dappered.com
.
—
Beth:
The saying is the first thing a woman notices about a man is his shoes. As much as I like figuring out my own personal style, I’ve never been into owning a bunch of really nice shoes. Any truth to this tired (or maybe true) saying? And if it’s not the shoes, what do women notice first?
– Corry
Hi Corry,
Honestly, I don’t think there are many women who notice a man’s shoes first. We notice them eventually, that’s absolutely true. Teeth, smile, skin, hair, whether your clothing is clean, wrinkled, well-fitting, any of these areas probably get the once-over before we look at the shoes. But yes, women notice shoes. And we judge. We judge your shoes.
The good news is that we’re not expecting you to have “a bunch of really nice shoes.” It’s neither practical nor economical for every guy out there to have an extensive collection of shoes. If you’re climbing utility poles in work boots five days a week, why on earth would you need a closet full of expensive shoes? (Though if you’re litigating in a courtoom five days a week, then yes, you probably need–and we might expect you to have–a variety of good quality shoes.) That said, women don’t want to see those work boots on the weekend or after you get off of work. And save the running shoes for when you’re, you know, running.
In an earlier draft of this week’s column (what? you write multiple drafts of this thing? yes, nothing short of perfection for my fellas) I tried to make a list of what a basic, bare bones shoe wardrobe should have. But I was adding all these caveats depending on what climate you live in, how many vacations you take, whether you were a devoted follower of Lost, you know, all the critical demographic info, and it got a little complicated. So I’ll just say this: a pair or two of nice dress shoes, a pair or two of nice sandals, a pair or two of loafers or boat shoes. Fashion sneakers and boots
Corry, seeing as you’re someone who enjoys exploring style, I would encourage you to begin thinking about shoes as an integral part of your style. Shoes can be as important as your choice of pants or the pattern on your tie. Plus…shoes are fun! I think all of us here can agree that style is entertaining, otherwise we wouldn’t spend so much time and energy thinking about it, chatting about it, spending money on it. Shoes are just one more area toward which you can direct that creative impulse.
-Beth
Got a question for Beth? Send them to: askawoman@dappered.com
Beth, please tell me you did NOT put “sandals” on the short list of shoes every man should have? Eww! And you even suggested that more than one pair might be required. I must admit, I’m baffled. Maybe on a vacation in the keys or the islands, but that is pretty much it for scenarios requiring “mandals”. Save the $$ and buy yourself some nice wingtip boots, or maybe those Timberland Earthkeeper boots that get so much play on this site. Nobody wants to see your hobbit feet, trust me.
What’s the big deal? I like to see a man in sandals on occasion, especially a nice pair like the ones she linked to.
+1 to DaveS. If the occasion is not Chaco-worthy, leave the sandals at home, or better yet, in the store.
Although Beth is swimming upstream on the sandals thing, she has defended sandals on guys before: http://dappered.com/2011/04/exposing-the-man-foot-guys-and-sandals/ Give her some credit, she’s been consistent. I myself don’t wear em’, but… I do wonder if the style winds will shift sometime in the future, and all of a sudden fashion mags start pushing men in sandals.
Women will deduct points for having the wrong shoes more often then they reward points for having the right shoes. And take her advice, shoes are integral.
Oh, puhlease. The disdain of sandals is just a reveal of the unflattering side of thinking too much about style: once we get beyond thinking about style as a way to simply look and feel good, and cross into the territory of bashin other’s footwear choices, then we know for a fact we are in douchebag territory. Fashion exists chiefly to assert class superiority over the unelightened masses, and actually buying into this attitude for me is the biggest style sin of them all. Truly stylish and aristocratic people possess an innate sense of equality with anything that is alive, and would never feel compelled to smugly berate other’s footware choices based on obscure “rules”.
Appropriate sandals are fine. In fact, anything that does not severly violate basic and simple rules of color and shape coordination, and is appropriate for the occasion or whatever a person is doing is fine. Most workplaces are probablly unappropriate for sandals, but to oppose them on principle? Sad. The mass-style bashing is necessary for the fashion magazines to have something to write about and sell, but for the rest of use that simply means knowing not to show up in a business meeting in giant sneakers. And there is a lot of leeway on even on that depending on industry or geographical location.
The other thing that is overplayed (in shoes and in general) is the obsession with quality. At the rate most of use here buy shoes, nobody is going to wear them, or even want them, for 10 years. Cheap, good enough shoes of the kind we see on Dappered are the way to go. Let’s put the rest of the money in the bank.
Wear sandals around the yard on a day when lounging in the pool or on vacation
What’s the thought on wearing Chucks? I practically live in my high-top Allstars.
Disagree with the last paragraph. Cheap shoes usually look cheap and offer poor value. As for not wanting them in 10 years, I certainly don’t feel that way about my Alden shell cordovan oxfords. As long as you are not wearing a pair of square toe abominations, there is little reason to feel buyer’s remorse when it comes to shoes.
Accessories, not shoes, are where you skimp and try to save money.
I think people who don’t like sandals just don’t live in the right climate. I live in Florida and would almost never look twice at someone wearing sandals. To be honest, I would probably admire someone wearing the sandals linked in the article. I would be more in favor of flip-flops, but for most people that’s even more reprehensible.
I would be interested to hear where some of these people live. If you do live in a more tropical climate and hate open-toed shoes, then maybe I’ll just consider you a traditionalist. Otherwise, I’ll ignore your advice on open-toed shoes if you ignore my advice on scarves.
I agree with this. While I am not a “shoe hound” (far from it), I am beginning to understand the importance of good craftsmanship. I’ve had a pair of Clarks for ten years and they are still doing the job (–and that’s just Clarks!).
I recently decided to pass up a cheap shoe deal in order to save for something really nice. I think it may be several months until I spend over $200 on shoes, but thanks to Dappered I now have a clue and will no longer be careless about what goes on my feet.
For the younger crowd in Florida (in their 20’s), having a pair of sandals and boat shoes is a must. Unless you’re going somewhere that upscale clothing is required, sandals and boat shoes work just fine.
Add to that one or two dress shoes (black and brown), and a nice pair of sneakers (I’ve got a great pair of burgundy Rockport sneakers). With that you should be set for any level of dress and be able to expand.
How about Crocs?
More seriously though…
Shoes are the obvious thing to economise on. Few people pay any attention to them and they are relatively expensive. I mean how many complements do you really get on your footwear? However I’m increasing realising that shoes can complete an outfit. (sorry sounds girly I know). I used to rely on trainers for pretty much everything casual. Hot weather, cold weather, whatever. Nowadays though… Chino shorts and a shirt, just are not the same without going to the extra effort of pairing them with some boat shoes. A sharp suit can’t be carried off if you are wearing cheap thick soled clunkers on your feet. Even winter wear, just looks better with a nice pair of boots. Don’t necessarily have to pay a fortune in my opinion. But do go to the effort of getting the most appropriate footwear for the occasion. Details maybe, but those details can make the difference between ‘looking’ the part and ‘feeling’ the part.
you can’t be serious.
I’m a big fan of consolidating to what is needed. That said I’ll list my shoe collection.
I have 1 pair of black leather Dexter lace up dress shoes. 1 pair of brown Florsheim zip up ankle boots. 1 pair of greyish blue Sperry boat shoes. 1 pair of Timberland brown loafers that are well worn in (sometimes work in them). and last 1 pair of Vans lo pros in black . I’ve also got a pair of cross trainers for running, gym, etc. but these aren’t a part of my “wardrobe”. Also NOT A SINGLE pair of sandals, EVER.
I like to think this can be all a man needs, I never question the shoes for any occasion
and minimizing helped a ton.
I forgot to also add 1 pair of forest green 1901 suede oxfords.
I forgot to also add 1 pair of forest green 1901 suede oxfords.
“I mean how many complements do you really get on your footwear?”
You ask this as a byproduct of your first sentence. You need to invest a little in shoes to get compliments thereon. That being said, agree that you don’t need 20 pairs of shoes as a guy. I have more dress shoes (for work) than I do casual shoes. A pair of desert boots (reco on Clark’s) and a pair of boat shoes (reco on Sperry’s) will take you a long way. I’d go name brand on both, as (1) they’re the classics and (2) I’ve found they are solid quality-wise. Others may think that you’ll be too fratty or boring, but there’s a reason that these items are still in style after years and years. In my opinion, one should buy for your style which can be long-lasting, not for fashion which is typically short-lived.
Sandals are like hiking boots — great for the right occasion, time and place, but rarely should be worn otherwise (unless you live at the beach, and in that case, I hate you). I still have my old rainbows, but living in the City I never wear them outside my apartment unless I’m on vacation.
I judge women by their shoes as well. Tells you a lot about the person.
Don’t get me wrong. My shoes ain’t cheap. I just think expensive shoes are a luxury.
(My favourites pairs are my ‘Paul Smith’ and ‘Reiss’ dress shoes, and my Camper boots).
I wouldn’t put sandals on such a short list, but I’d put it on a longer one. And depends on where you live.
as to complements about shoes.. plenty,specially from individuals who appreciates and obviously recognize classics and quality of my C&J, AE,a Aldens (some are 15+ yrs old) …and for the squared toe patent leather wearing crowd, I don’t give a darn to what they say or think…
PS, I am not a big baller, just a firm believer of you get what you paid for…
Doesn’t matter if they did–I’d still never wear ’em.
Anyone who doesn’t approve of Chucks can go straight to HELL.
And that’s you. And as I often sometimes have to remind some in the comments, you’re not everyone.