M&S gladiator sandals

[Userengage]

Are these awful? I really like them however my DC physically recoiled when I tried them on, they are slouchy teens so I kind of get it. I thought they were kind of cool and would be nice dressed up (flippy short skirt) or down (denim shorts). Gladiators

I think a poster tried on a puffer jacket and said they couldn’t wear it because they looked like Suzy Quattro’s fat nan. Unfortunately that humour took off and many others try to emulate it but it usually falls short of the intended mark.

I just wish women would stop putting themselves down.

Ah thanks.

Hmmm. I thought that thread (which I had to look up, being a relative newcomer to MN) originated as a fairly self-deprecating post. People were gently mocking of themselves, after realising that the fantasy of how they might look in something didn't match the reality.

The OP had finally found a Sezane leather jacket that she'd loved but was out of stock, with the hope that she'd look a bit Debbie Harry rock & roll chick in it. Instead, as she had broad shoulders, she said she felt like a giant teddy bear/yeti in it. I have a fake fur jacket that does exactly that to me, so I could identify.

A poster compared her own reflection to "Suzie Quatro's fat nan" a bit further down the same thread. Whether you like it or not, it's quite a vivid descriptor!

I'm not sure if the comments became mocking of other people further down the thread, as I didn't read much further. But I've read plenty of much crueller, more judgmental threads on MN.

I’m dying 🤣

I like ankle gladiator sandals but those and heinous OP Im sorry!
A previous poster hit the nail on the head when they said they look like callipers. They also look cheaply made (and I have nothing against cheap fashion)

I love and wear a certain current style of oversized dresses and would be very pleased if I never had to read the words ‘Grayson Perry’ on here ever again.

Its not just misogynist, unoriginal and not funny, its not even accurate. I think at this point the posters who love to use most it to insult women who wear stuff they don’t like have never even seen the (offensive in itself, imo) drag character ‘Claire’.

I've been tempted to buy these ones but apparantly the quality at ba&sh is horrendous and customer service online is non existant from what I have read from reviews. They look great but would feel gutted if the quality was bad and returns were a nightmare

I agree
hideous unless you’re dressing up as a Roman!

Hang fire I bet they’ll be loads in the sale mega cheap

Gladiator sandals generally speaking are quite nice - but the specific ones you picked are awful OP, sorry. They come halfway up your legs! If they stopped at the ankle they would be a lot better. I would get different gladiator sandals from elsewhere, I really would avoid those M&S ones like the plague.

I just spluttered my drink over my phone🤣🤣🤣

I've got a lovely blouse from Ba&sh that I wear very regularly and the quality has been great, though I have not tried their shoes.

Would anyone wear the Pucci ones I put a link to?!

I loved the ones i had as a student in the early 80s, when they were very fashionable! Didn't have zips though.

Sorry, grim

Nobody would look good in those, they are hideous.

No. They're even uglier than the M & S ones.

They are and I didn’t think that was even possible.

Luckily they only come in brown, which I don't really wear. If they came in black or tan I would be sorely tempted ...

I think you're giving much more credit to that poster than she's due. She didn't point out any hyperbole (her post wasn't as measured or thoughtful as that. She was simply rude - & quite aggressively so?

Her post was deleted by MNHQ as, I assume, they considered it as unpleasant as I & several others did. Enough to have broken their guidelines. I think the hyperbole was all hers, in accusing @SkippitySkoppity of lying (???), trying to make a joke for the benefit of other Mumsnetters, & being "sad". I can't quite remember the wording, but I've paraphrased it much more politely than her actual post.

As for the post that she attacked, I don't think @SkippitySkoppity saying that the sandals "give hints of poor Victorian invalids wearing callipers to correct their rickety legs" is meant to insult people with disabilities. It was a reference to the stereotype of the sickly invalid or pauper in Victorian literature. They're portrayed as wearing too-short dirty trousers with raggedy hems, pale & malnourished, with a severe illness &/or disability (coughing blood into a hanky, on crutches or in callipers).

To me, I read it as an instantly recognisable visual comparison to an outdated medical device - one that is, thankfully, now mostly superseded by much more effective ways of addressing bone malformations. Rickets are thankfully rare now too!

So that visual comparison did amuse me - not the thought of children having to wear callipers. However, @Slothlydoesit , I'm sorry if you were offended not just by that post, but by my being amused by it.

I am genuinely interested in why you find it offensive, though? As you obviously read it entirely differently to me!

I’m appalled actually that all these posters are laughing at the concept of someone looking like a ‘Victorian invalid with callipers’. That language is so outdated. It is obviously fine to say someone looks like a Victorian, but an ‘invalid with callipers’ is actually just another very old fashioned word for a disabled person with splints on their legs.

So to say someone would look awful because of that is not at all funny. It’s like saying someone looks like a spastic or making jokes about someone’s race or that only a person in a wheelchair would wear something so ‘retarded’. Using it as a way to be derogatory about a piece of clothing is just so ignorant.

I actually hate to make a fuss about this sort of thing and I’m pretty tolerant. I can’t believe I have to explain why describing something as ugly because it reminds you of a disabled person/disabled equipment is not funny. As well as having a disabled child I work for a charity that supports disabled children so I’m used to spending time with people with knowledge and care for the language they use and the effect that it can have on people. I have never heard people laughing about this sort of thing.

But sadly, maybe it’s quite common…

It’s very common among people with disabilities. I have a friend with cerebral palsy who complained in jest that he was pissed off when the charity name Scope replaced the Spastics Society because he used to get a discount in their shop. He frequently employs black humour because he hates in his words “how bloody precious people are about disability now”. I can well imagine him saying exactly that about those sandals.

Not the disabled people I know! Use of black humour yes, not other people laughing in ignorance.

What’s the difference?

It's the difference between say Ian Dury, who had polio, referring to himself as a "raspberry ripple" (cripple) and anyone who isn't disabled laughing at someone wearing calipers.

The "invalid Victorian child" simile wasn't funny. I agree with the deleted post.

Ian Dury also objected to "Scope" and wrote the song Spasticus Autisticous as a protest. He had a point, but I think by that time "spastic" was irretrievable as a useful term.

If anyone wants a good laugh I recommend tonight's Dead Ringers.