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

[Balcanoona]

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?

Next do too. I was thinking of buying DD something new when she started school, as she had all hand downs except trousers, but I had a huff when I saw the PE kit and gave her DS' old set.

The year before last, Tesco had plain black boys PE joggers and black joggers for girls with pink drawstrings. I went to M&S.

I hate those 'girls' polo shirts with the little pattern cut into the collar. I've bought my dd the standard ones for nursery. Mil bought some frilly ones in the next size up which we will use but I would ever buy them for her myself.

I've also seen girls and boys pe kits in asda, I've no idea why pe kit needs to be gendered. The mind boggles.

Oh God I cringe at the name 'Angry Angels' too. It has a trying-too-hard tone that puts me in mind of trendy vicars and middle-aged men with long ponytails and bald patches.

Sorry to go against the grain.....but isn't part of becoming 3,4,5 realising which gender you are. Boys or girls realise there are differences. Now whilst I agree that there is too much pink and limited choices of alternatives, I also think it is quite normal for girls or boys of this age to pick the colour associated (wrongly or rightly) with being a boy or a girl - it is part of them establishing themselves to themesleves and others as a boy or a girl - and I really think there isn't anything wrong with a bit of that. Yes, there is too much pink and the merits of other colours should be mentioned, but always pushing them away from the 'girly' option seems to become a bit legalistic to me. And TBH, once they are in school or nursery or wherever, the power of the crowd to like pink or blue or whatever is very powerful - again, it's not all bad - learning about being part of a group and fitting in is all part of early learning. I know we like to tell them to be independent and not give into peer pressure, rightly so, but at 3,4,5 a bit of learning to be part of a crowd too is valid. So I really think we shouldn't be too dogmatic about it all.

Go to a traditional school outfitters if you really want basic, non gender type polos etc.

I so agree... my DD wore Clarks (or similar) boys' shoes from 7 to 14... to get the support and be able to run round... She's thrilled to get her first pair of adult women's shoes that are just as comfortable and supportive and what she couldn't ever find amongst "girls' shoes"

I have 3 sons, one had very wide feet and at one point we had to have shoes made for him until he had a growth spurt and suddenly the width matched length, one had average feet for want of a better word and one had flat feet and worse Start Rite shoes with a reinforced instep. I don't think boys all have the same sort of feet.

My daughter had very narrow feet. Shoe shopping reduced me to tears on more than one occasion. I hate shoes.

wore not worse

But if boys and girls all really have totally different feet, all those girls of MNers on this thread should not be able to wear boys' shoes, no?

Well my son couldn't wear boys shoes for approx 3 years, H fitting were much too narrow for him.

Are boys' and girls' shoes made using different lasts, or not?