Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think clarks and start rite are sexist when it comes to school shoes

136 replies

Balcanoona · 01/09/2016 07:29

Buying school shoes for DD 9 and 11 yesterday - both walk to school, one along the canal, the eldest has narrow feet. But the only girls shoes on offer from these two companies has very thin soles which would be worn through within a month. The boys shoes had thick soles and far more robust. The extremely helpful shop assistant told me they were "fashion shoes" and companies don't really think about practicalities. We found another brand more suitable, but really, for 9 year old to think they don't run about - AIBU?

OP posts:
LucilleBluth · 01/09/2016 08:14

You are right op. I managed to find a pair of chunky Mary Janes with a decent tread on the bottom from M&S for DD, the quality is so good that I have bypassed Clarks for my two teen DSs as well.

baringan · 01/09/2016 08:16

Totally agree. Both companies shocking. We normally buy kickers but this year they only have the t bar in patent which is not allowed Sad

Witchend · 01/09/2016 08:17

I would think it's far more market driven than sexist. My ds wouldn't want a slip on light shoe. He wants one as close to a trainer as he can get. My girls like something light and comfortable but also care far more about the look.

Ds is the only one to ever wear out his shoes-dd1 once didn't go up a size for 2 years and the shoes were still in reasonable condition. I reckon with ds that 6 months is good.

PitchFork · 01/09/2016 08:17

yanbu
dd wears closed shoes for school. we also walk a lot and dd loves to climb which I think is dangerous in flimsy shoes without much support.

baringan · 01/09/2016 08:18

Debenhams have a pair of chunky Mary Janes.

Honeslty start rite are awful. It's either the lace up brogue (hates lace ups, too slow) or a mess of flowery shite.

PitchFork · 01/09/2016 08:18

I also refuse to call them 'boys shoes' they are children's shoes ffs

baringan · 01/09/2016 08:18

Dd would LOVE a trainer type shoe bit doesn't want boys!!

youngestisapsycho · 01/09/2016 08:19

I used to buy my DDs Startrite shoes. They had lovely thick soles, and lasted the whole school year.... Was a few years ago though, maybe they have changed. Clarks were always crap.

Notso · 01/09/2016 08:20

There seems to be more than just Mary Janes on the website a lot girls in DS1's class wear the penny or the desertlnd.

AllMyBestFriendsAreMetalheads · 01/09/2016 08:20

We walk to school and pretty shoes just don't cut it. Also, the last 2 pairs of clarks school shoes I bought for her lasted less than a term. I wouldn't have minded if they were a cheap pair from the supermarket, but they're not.

We've gone for docs this year but it was still hard to find a shoe that looks nice yet is robust. We've managed to get a unisex style but she's not totally happy with it, because she's firmly got the message that girls shoes have to look nice.

I do think we can blame clarks when they market themselves as being all about school shoes yet fail to provide decent footwear suitable for all children at school for 190 days a year.

Squeegle · 01/09/2016 08:22

pitchfork, but adults shoes and clothes are divided by gender in shops, why wouldn't children's shoes be?

MrsJayy · 01/09/2016 08:23

Trainers are unisex tell her that

GoldenPlatitudes · 01/09/2016 08:23

My DD wears Docs, she loves them

Stopyourhavering · 01/09/2016 08:23

Adult shoes not much better

baringan · 01/09/2016 08:25

The Clarks penny lasted half a term Sad

Shock horror dd plays football at break

HateSummer · 01/09/2016 08:29

I stopped using clarks 3 years ago for school shoes. They changed their styles and girls shoes look so flimsy. Tried hush puppies 2 years ago and they were also shit.

Last year I bought sketchers from m&m online and was very happy. The heel wasn't wasted and the leather stayed nice and new with regular polishing. We also bought boots from h&m which turned out to be good quality.

ittooshallpass · 01/09/2016 08:29

Whatever the brand my DD chooses from the boys range, she detests the girls shoes [proud].

She likes the full coverage and sturdiness of the shoes in the boys range.

5moreminutes · 01/09/2016 08:31

We got DS's first pair of school shoes from Clarkes and they lasted under 2 weeks before they were unwearable - the sole split from the upper. Its playing football on wet grass that does it I think, but they don't have to be that crap, he has since had other shoes that have lasted until outgrown, though it took a lot of trial and error.

School shoes are a weird phenomenon just because they are worn in a situation where the child doesn't usually have a choice of shoes to put on to play - outside school they might put on wellies or football boots or trainers or smart shoes or go bare foot, and a school shoe has to cover all those uses. Clarkes shoes aren't up to it - they aren't too bad until they get wet, but football on a wet surface during first playtime a few times in a row and they are fit for the bin.

So I'd say they are no good for boys for the use they are sold for (which is a universal shoe that will withstand all the different things a child does and would normally wear different types of shoe for if not at school) either... but some people seem to have different experiences.

MuddlingMackem · 01/09/2016 08:33

Another one here whose DD wears school shoes from the boys' range.

And Clarks can do 'boy' style shoes for girls. During her first couple of years at school I managed to buy a couple of pairs for DD from ebay which were like the boys - covered with a velcro strap - and the only 'girly' touch was embroidered hearts on the strap.

shouldwestayorshouldwego · 01/09/2016 08:33

And let's not start on the 'choose a fun boy or girl' app. Dd2 just stared at the shop assistant with the sort of withering, silent contempt that only a tweenager can master. Fortunately we managed to bypass the characters once the shop assistant realised that despite her diminutive size dd was no longer going to be cajoled into accepting some dancing sparkly 'friend', but there was no way she would click on the boy to make an ironic statement on the underlying gender stereotyping of the presumption that she would want a girl to help her.

Original poster
Balcanoona · 01/09/2016 08:35

Thank you for your feedback - glad it's not just me - we ended up going to a local independent and got kickers - good thick robust soles. I also object to star trite (oops auto correct) naming one model "angry Angels" -

OP posts:
AnnPerkins · 01/09/2016 08:39

Clarke sent my friend's son home with different sized shoes, actually two sizes different. Son wore them for six months before my friend noticed.

Quodlibet · 01/09/2016 08:40

Yanbu. I've looked EVERYWHERE on the high street for sturdy non-pink and sparkly shoes for my 2.8 yr old. She's at nursery FFS, she spends her days climbing things, she doesn't need a flimsy pair of patent Mary Janes and yet that is ALL they stock. She's also too young to pester for pink but that's all there is on sale.

MrsJamin · 01/09/2016 08:41

In the playground before school I actually heard a mum ask her daughter not to play football as it would scuff her shoes. Ridiculous of the mum, yes, but also ridiculous of the shoe companies not to make shoes that girls would like and would be able to play football in.

Stopandlook · 01/09/2016 08:43

Love those kickers! Can't wait until mine are out of the Lelli Kelly phase...