Mais, elles sont des bottes ou des chaussures??

I’m not enamoured of the sandal-boot thing that seems to be doing the rounds. Bleurgh. It’s just about the least attractive thing a woman can put on the end of her foot. First, women’s toes aren’t ‘all that’. Mostly, they’re deformed, crooked, bunion-y, corn-y. Unless nails are painted, there are nasty yellow nails, dead skin. Urgh. And heels are the second part of the foot that is unattractive. Lots of nasty dead skin there, too.

So why would someone make a shoe that features both parts of the foot that are horrid, and not the arch, curve or soft skin of the upper foot??! It makes no sense! They must be a man. A man who hates women.

Office. A place where shoe accidents congregate

Not only that, but they all appear to be in hideous colours. What’s that about?! Men have to wear grey and brown. Women don’t. I guess, in black, they might look marginally better, but that’s like putting a bow on the elephant man.

Anyway, it’s taken its time, but these have now made their way off the catwalk and on to the streets of the North West. No. Just no. The whole point of boots is that they are warm, practical and waterproof. The whole point of a sandal is that they are cool, ridiculous and not at all waterproof. So why would you put the two together?! It’s hideous!

It’s another Lady Gaga moment. I bet she’d wear them. Plus, they don’t even have a name of their own, from bootie sandals (which sound like shoes for your arse) to bandals to gladiator booties … and how do you categorise them. Are they a boot? Are they a sandal? Are they a flat?

I don’t know whether it’s the suede – never a good fabric for looking good, compared to patent leather – or the colour – beige – bleurgh – the toes (not my most favourite part of the body, it must be said. I hate toe cleavage more than arse cleavage) or the whole style, but they just don’t work. And if you have them on in Bury on a Saturday morning, then you’re probably in need of medication, an eye test or help getting dressed. Or you’re pre-menstrual. A lot of disasters happen because of hormones. Someone needs to have a word with these people, just like the little boy in the Emperor’s New Clothes.

Ooh La La! Lady Marmalade or just plain Ga-Ga?

For some time, I have become aware of a hideous tights-based disaster that has become a ‘fashion’ amongst the youth. I first witnessed it on the daughter of the notorious ‘bike of Bury’ – a woman so infamous for ‘back door sex’ that it is regularly discussed at pubs. Alright, maybe not ‘regularly’. But quite often. I have the misfortune of sometimes being privy to such conversations. And every man there, out of seven, had had the dubious honour of illicit back-door sex with this slutty ‘Sammy Jo’ lookalike. She had the misfortune to have a child with an aggressive alcoholic hell-bent on death-by-booze, which added to her brood, but has not tamed down the slaggy behaviour. Quite frankly, she makes me violently ill, as do her family. More on them another time.

Anyway, daughter-of-whore was at a birthday party for a friend of mine (complete with aforementioned whore and her ex-sister-in-law (drug addict, epileptic and possibly moderate learning difficulties with a child she named after a famous Satanist. You couldn’t make this up.) and a couple of their whore-y friends) wearing something that turned many a man’s eye. Not in an attractive way. In a way that said ‘Oh My God! She MUST be up for it!’

Not surprisingly, it made Steve’s mum and I feel quite ill. Not only because the girl was 16 but because she was, at the time, a little on the podgy side.

The worst bit was that she was quite fat, so the leggings had stretched and the holes were H-U-G-E, including those over her arse.

There are several questions raised by Fashionista.com about the wearing of such apparel, for instance:

• Should these be worn with a dress or just with a top?

I say ‘or at all?’. Certainly, the top didn’t work with podgy daughter-of-whore. A dress… well, that’s silly. They just look like ripped 60 denier tights. It looks like a drunken fashion mishap. I think, personally, they’re designed to have a brightly coloured pair underneath, so they look through the slashes.  They’re not designed to show off too much corned-beef-and-lard skin in January snow. I think Kylie could carry them off, as can Lady Ga-Ga, but they’re renowned skinnies and Ga-Ga is bonkers.

Lady Ga-Ga in The Sun

I wore slashed jeans (often with spandex underneath). It wasn’t big. It wasn’t clever. It looked awful. However, jeans, at least, are clothes, not would-be tights.

Anyway… these have come back to my attention today because I saw a girl wearing them on her way up Bury Road at 8:56 a.m. Not a good look. I was half-tempted to wind the window down and ask her how much. On Ga-Ga, it’s okay, because she’s crazy. And she is a pop icon. It’s expected of her. But of a girl in Breightmet on a Tuesday morning? Well, it’s just all a little too much for me. I’m so old!! Mind you, even when I was a girl, I knew what looked like a prostitute on the prowl and what looked fine for a 17 year old. And I think even the 17 year old me would admit these are just a bit too ‘Cher’ for words. That’s okay if you’re entertaining the United States Navy as some kind of ‘entertainment’, but not if you’re on your way to work. Unless your work is as a lady of the night. Then I might accept this is appropriate attire.