Is this really the agony of the feet?

@101 Uh, because it's a scam site.

http://birthdayshoes.com/these-are-not-v…

I'll believe these are about health and not a fad when I still see people wearing them in 10 years.

These draw attention to your toes. Nobody wants to see, visualize or smell you fucking toes. This goes for flip flops and sandals as well. These are for sad fucks too lazy to look good. I have yet to see these on anybody you could describe as fat. Mostly on crunchy hippies. Wear them if you please but don't be surprised if you are treated like a foul doddering drone.

I think these would be perfect for the toe-less people on one's gift-list. If worn with strappy shoes or sandals no one would ever suspect.

They're better looking than most Birkenstocks and Tevas. Certainly better looking than flip flops (I cannot abide the sight of people's thick, curling, untrimmed, hairy, yellowed toenails. *shudder*) (Why, yes, I do have a foot phobia, why do you ask?)

Maybe they need to make them in better colors. I mean, making the toes a different color from the rest of the foot IS kind of heinous.

Make 'em in clear, like jelly sandals!

@105- So should everyone wear gloves as well so you don't have to see their fucking fingers?

You don't have to respect my feelings about these shoes, but you do have to live with my opinion of you if I see you wearing them.

@18- Plenty of attractive people in utilitarian clothing. I love a woman in cargo shorts.

@45: In fact, they're much less worse than flip-flops. Neither is dressy, but at least these are functional. And I see people wearing flip-flops with formal wear, as well as merely dressy wear, all the damn time. Not to mention flip-flops in below-freezing weather. So I'm sure we'll see Fivefingers in increasingly-inappropriate situations. And if they were cheaper, probably on lots of people.

But are the toes really the problem? Or the colors/materials? Would people be as up in arms over a pair in subdued monochromatic shoeleather, rather than bright green-and-blue? At a glance, they'd look just like casual shoes at that point, and lack of colors/edges would make the separate-toe-ness much less obvious.

@86 - think about it, our actual fleshy articulated toes are a mere vestige of being in trees a long time ago, and not necessary for upright ambulatory purposes of modern homo sapiens (save for the big toe separate from the other 4)...

Yes and no. It depends on how much time you spend changing elevation (climbing, crouching, etc.). Dancers, acrobats, clowns, martial artists, athletes, and physical performers of all stripes benefit from articulated toes. That these may arguably represent a minority of modern homo sapiens is not exactly a credit to our sedentary species.

I always find the fashionista response to utilitarian trends in athletic gear a little perplexing, given that body shapes of which the aforementioned approve are achievable only through constant exercise, crystal meth, or liver failure (or some combination of two or more of the above).

@110 - Plenty of attractive people in utilitarian clothing. I love a woman in cargo shorts.

Indeed. I think that may be key to my Sarah Silverman crush.

Faux utility hewn from industrial materials, swallowed by folks with to much disposable income and not enough personality. Way to reinvent the wheel marketing dept. at Vibram! Good-for-hiking-and-climbing-REI-bullcrap.
Condolences to the injured people, please proceed.

I have webbed feet. I can not wear them.

*sob*

They look dapper with my Utilikilt.

I'm pretty sure those things go against G-Ds provision condemning clothing of mixed fibers.

They're not as bad as Tevas.

Have two pairs. Love them. As do my crazy runner friends.

I don't see how it could possibly be good for your feet and joints to run in them. Besides, they're fucking hideous. I'll take the six-inch Louboutins any day.