to ask you all to contact Brantano regarding these shoes?

[IsSamNormansDad]

Here
Was buying wellies for DS in Brantano today, and those hideous shoes caught my eye. I asked the duty manager if they were dressing up shoes as I had assumed, she replied 'No. They are for general wear.' She also mentioned that this style was extremely popular.
My DD is only 6m, so this kind of thing doesn't really affect me yet, but surely shoes like this worn regularly would damage a childs feet?
I also think that they are highly inappropriate for small children (available from kids size 9) as high heels are seen as 'sexy' shoes by many people.
I do NOT think that high heels for children neccessarily encourage inappropriate behaviour, but surely Mumsnets' campaign 'Let Girls Be Girls' is against this?
I am quite prepared to be flamed and told that it's none of my business, but if you feel the same, let Brantano know.

My DD (age 7) went to a wedding and I tried to buy party shoes for her. The ones she tried on were flat but didn't stay on as no bar across, so actually for a wedding or party I think they are ok.

Oh god how awful. It's not just dancing shoes, it's a grooming shoe - it's teaching girls from an early age, that to be pretty and nice, you shouldn't expect to be comfortable and fully mobile. So that when they get older, they'll accept the fact that they feel permanently uncomfortable in their horrible shoes because you're supposed to feel uncomfortable as a woman. At least when I was a kid, shoes which damaged my body frame, didn't actually become available to me until my mid-to late teens.

Vile. Nobody would ever think of buying a boy shoes that would restrict his mobility even just for a few parties. It's so sad that girls aren't valued as much.

I wish they did them in am adult 5 - I love them.

Why are you all saying they are for 7+ yos? My DD is 4 and is a size 9 - the size they start from. Would you let your 4 yo wear shoes like that?

HereBeBolloX - show me a boy who wants those shoes and I'll be so impressed I'll buy them for him! I'm afraid you sound like a bit of a fright to be honest - are you really that earnest?

It's against mumsnet rules to personally insult other posters Bats.

HTH.

HereBeBolloX, those shoes would not restrict any childs movements. As the child of parents who were dance teachers, I learnt to dance from an early age, and wore shoes very similar to that. I could whizz around a dance floor very easily with no problems.

it's a grooming shoe - it's teaching girls from an early age, that to be pretty and nice, you shouldn't expect to be comfortable and fully mobile. So that when they get older, they'll accept the fact that they feel permanently uncomfortable in their horrible shoes because you're supposed to feel uncomfortable as a woman

what the actual fuck????

Go away Bollox - that was not an insult - it's an observation. I can't help it if you have taken it as an insult can I? Are you ever so serious as well as ever so earnest?

bats have you ever wore of fotball boots? now they are fucking uncomfertable.

Serious? I didn't mean serious. I meant sensitive.

Bored now.

No festi I haven't. Have you? And in what context?

LOL, is that really thatn shocking, squeaky?

I think if little girls are encouraged to wear clothes and shoes that restrict their movements from a young age, they won't resist buying shitty shoes and clothes that make them feel uncomfortable when they're older. They'll have been trained to accept that discomfort is normal

Why's that such a shocking concept?

The reason boys don't want shoes like that, is because they're not trained to want shoes like that. They're not taught to aspire to shoes like that. If we all brought up boys to want to mince around in high heels (as dandies did in the eighteenth century) then they would want shoes like that.

Jesus, they're sparkly Hanna Montana party shoes, it's hardly foot binding ffs

oh do behave herB. bit of a fright is hardly a searing character assassination - in fact its kind of old school my giddy aunt type quip.im sure youve heard worse so do ease up on the no personal insults as its against the rules.

and grooming shoes was shocking hyperbole.v socialsciencetastic.straight to top of class in gender studies for that well thought out discourse

I'll go away when I'm good and ready Bats.

Telling someone that they are a bit of a fright, is a personal insult, which is why I quite reasonably took it as such.

Just own it, will you, instead of hiding behind passive aggressive smileys.

Just because they do them in that size doesn't mean you have to buy them. You don't need to write to Brantano, just don't buy the shoes. If a particular brand doesn't sell well, they will replace it with one that does.

yes i have they are uncomfortable in the context they are designed, you are assuming these are uncomfortable in the context they are designed.

I dont and never have found heels uncomfortable.

They are Hannah Montana shoes and every little girl's dream!

Trust me though, when I say, the Hannah phase doesn't last long .

I prefer a young girl to look like a girl, not see her stomping around in doc martens or some other clumpy shoes if the occasion calls for her to dress nicely.

The females I have known all my life have minds of their own, and are fully capable of wearing whatever shoes THEY feel comfortable in for the occasion, myself included.

Well it's interesting that you raised the subject of foot binding Sookeh.

I prefer a young girl to look like herself.

given how quickly other threads eg feminist shout troll and diss people
bit of a fright is positively tame in comparison

festi are you sure you're talking to the right person? Only I have made no comment on the comfort or otherwise of these shoes. I'm sure you must have got me mixed up with someone who gives a shit whether they are comfortable or not!

ha ha sorry bats, teach me to make sure I remember user names and responding to the proper person.

that is the second time I have bmixed up posters, will take more care in future.