From: T.K.

Date: 1-12-2019

There is the idea that “nobody wants to see a man’s feet” assuming that men have uglier feet.  In beauty magazines, websites and such, women get a lot of tips how to make their feet presentable for summer, whereas men only read “Cover them up” – and it seems that in society a man’s head and hands are the only body parts acceptable to show.

The visual difference between the healthy feet of men and woman is rather limited though. Male feet are typically a bit longer and wider.  They might have a bit more hair on top of the feet and along the legs.  That’s about it, I don’t see the fundamental difference here – the same differences apply to hands and nobody thinks that those of men should be covered.

In western societies, women tend to look more after their feet, as any pedicure shop will confirm: They have mostly female customers. Shoes for women come in shapes that are more detrimental to the feet, on the other hand/foot they don’t have the problem of wearing hot enclosed shoes all year round, even on hot summer days, as it is more socially acceptable for women to wear sandals. High heeled, narrow shoes lead to more deformations in women.  As a consequence to the idea that “male feet must be hidden”, some men forget about their feet all together and totally neglect them. They might not be as deformed but get other problems such as fungus, ingrown nails, sweat and smell … Curiously it’s socially accepted when women wear totally impractical shoes that hinder and hurt them, then take them off at some point during the party and continue dancing barefoot. A man showing up in ill-fitting footwear would be seen as a total dork.

There is also the problem that male fashion is a lot more uniform.  There are strict rules in higher society for when and to what occasion you can wear what color of suit/shoes. Following those rules strictly and conforming to the expectations appears to be what makes you acceptable in society … really?

A woman’s outfit can be more “daring” while still fitting in. When she’s barefoot that might be seen as an especially quirky form of daring but not totally out of place. For a man it’s a clear departure from a much more restrictive standard.

I personally think that a man can dress smartly with bare feet. Long trousers are certainly more formal, but should never touch the ground so the legs are shorter than typically recommended; I go for pant legs that just don’t touch the back of the foot when standing.

Whether brighter or darker fabrics are preferred is a matter of taste; I think it looks very fine with white or natural linen. Add to that a nice shirt and blazer and you’re perfectly dressed for any occasion, to my taste. The thing with taste and clothing standards is that it’s different from one person to the next …

In history, gender differences went both ways. In some countries, at some point in time, it seems like it was more common for young boys to go barefoot and have adventures outside, whereas young girls tried to be “lady like” and dressed up which included shoes. Or here was actually the misguided idea that going barefoot would “ruin” a lady’s foot and make it appear too masculine.

I prefer living in a world where the barefoot option is open to all regardless of gender, age, country or social class. It can be something that connects us all, isn’t that wonderful?