Tribal people who don’t wear shoes have very wide feet compared to people who wear shoes. I saw a commercial for “natural” shoes talking about how narrow even athletic shoes or standard shoes are compared to theirs. They claim that this changes the bones structure of the foot and can cause issues. I understand why we wear shoes, but why did we make them so narrow to the point that it changes our foot? Is there a benefit?
In: 4245
Narrow pointed shoes were a sign of wealth as you can’t work the fields in pointed shoes. Early shoes were straight lasted (not left or right) and you had to wear them in to fit your feet.
As shoes became a mass produced people went for narrow shoes to show you were going to school/working indoors indicating you were at least middle class and not a farmer/factory worker.
I wouldn’t trust the foot “facts” presented an advertisement meant to sell “revolutionary” shoes. There is a long history of failed new shoes that are “better” for your health than conventional shoes. The premise that “tribal” people have wider feet than everyone else sounds sus and is probably an incorrect generalisation. As to why we wear shoes, it’s pretty simple, they protect our feet from pain and damage. Feet are incredibly important to our survival so we wear protective gear.
Pointed toed shoes were created for riding on horses. It is easier to put your shoe in the stirrup if the toe is pointed.
Heeled shoes were created for the same reason. The angle where the sole and heel meet helped keep your shoe in the stirrup.
Rich people rode horses, poor people did not. So shoes with pointed toes and heels were for rich people. So people wore them even if they were not riding a horse to appear rich enough to own a horse.
Modern clothes style for formal clothes was set in the 19th century. The actual style varies in detail, but basically men’s suits are based on 19th century military uniforms and women’s dresses and shoes are based on 19th century women’s fashion.
So women still wear shoes that are supposed to look like they are rich enough to ride a horse.
Well, there are tons of physical attributes that are favored at various times throughout history.
The issue is that humans are the only ones who can really take steps towards altering ourselves to those standards.
There doesn’t have to be a direct evolutionary benefit to things like that, other than the obvious one of something visually appealing making it easier to attract a mate.
At various times extra weight was good, today less weight is good. There’s no direct evolutionary benefit for piercings, but plenty of people do it. Liposuction, implants, extreme fitness levels, etc.
In short, there are things that have *some* small advantages, and we’re able to really focus on those things and push them to extremes.
I see a lot of explanations for why narrower shoes are fashionable, but none for why they are also practical.
Shoes have to stay attached to your feet or you will slide about and eventually twist an ankle (try wearing shoes that are too big to demonstrate why). This attachment or friction is most comfortable with shoes that are a little tight on the sides, with some “wiggle room” at the toes and heel, rather than the other way around.
Most shoes today are mass produced for a nearly global marketplace. They are built to an ‘average’ size foot width for the market. To reduce costs a lot of shoe manufacturers only make shows in one width.
There is no benefit to wearing shows that are too tight, it is likely to cause foot pain and toe issues like hammer toes.
The only way to buy shoes that come in various widths is to spend a lot more.
Latest Answers