Just so you know I’m judging everyone in this thread.

  • @RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    21 hour ago

    What, or who?

    Comfort - wise I want long enough without being too big in every other direction. If I want to run in then, zero drop or close, not over constructed, comfortable out of the box. If I want to wear them for looks, it’s just Converse, always. I don’t need support and they fit fine and look ok.

  • @QualifiedKitten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 hours ago

    Comfort, which to me usually means:

    • good arch support
    • women’s wide or men’s standard (theoretically the same thing)
    • not a “stability” shoe (likely makes my supination worse)

    I’m also a child who hates tying my shoes, so a style that’s intended to slip on and off is preferred, but I can switch to elastic laces instead.

  • @some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    24 hours ago

    Comfort. I got into Atoms during the pan. At the time, they let you order different sized shoes because most people have slightly different sized feet. I got 10.5" on the right, 10.75" on the left. Best shoes I’ve ever owned.

    I assume they’re having financial problems because they stopped allowing that and they haven’t replenished inventory for my sizes for six months or longer.

  • Majorllama
    link
    fedilink
    46 hours ago

    All black.

    Soft squishy insoles.

    Skater type shoe.

    Will last more than a year.

    Less than 100 bucks.

    I have no brand loyalty. It’s whatever checks those boxes and I’m vibin with the one time I accidentally walk into a shoe store every 5 years.

  • @spittingimage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    47 hours ago

    Birds.

    One morning I got up and found an explosion of feathers in the entry. I mentally said goodbye to the owner and decided it must be the smallest cat - because there was no sign of the bird and she eats everything.

    Imagine my surprise when I went to put my shoe on and there was something soft and warm under my foot. There was a still-living, apparently unharmed, sparrow hiding in my sneaker. I released it outside and went on my way.

    Not the most pleasant experience, but I’m luckier than my mother-in-law who found one of these in her shoe. They bite when they feel threatened - that’s how she found it.

  • @IMALlama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    79 hours ago

    Cut to the shape of an actual foot and flexible/minimalistic sole. I live in the Midwest, so I’ll compromise some ok sole thickness in the winter. Standing in snow with my kid at the bus stop in minimalistic soles and even thicker socks makes for quick feet.

    Shape of your foot? I don’t understand why you would want your toes/foot contorted. I do not understand shoes that have a point in the middle of them. Either you’re smashing your toes together or your making something stick out in front of your foot that will mess up your gate.

    Minimalistic sole? This will get you landing more softly on your heel and help you use the balls of your feet more. It’s amazing to me how thick/soft the soles of some shoes are. I suspect they’re necessary to compensate for the way a lot of us walk.

    My feet feel fantastic and my motion feels very natural.

    • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      48 hours ago

      Cut to the shape of an actual foot […] I don’t understand why you would want your toes/foot contorted

      So much this! This is literally my criteria 1, 2 and 3 when choosing a sneaker, too.

      And there is now so little choice! Bullet-shaped sneakers have basically won the war against foot-shaped sneakers. I get the idea of design memes (think: fins on 1950s cars) but personally this one is completely mystifying to me. After all, sneakers code as “masculine”, but what is less masculine than something that looks like a ballet shoe?? I don’t get it!

      Come to think of it, maybe that’s the explanation - maybe it’s a corporate plot to make sports shoes unisex?

      BTW my two go-to vintage solutions are the New Balance 574 and the Onitsuka Ultimate 81. Coz it seems sneakers weren’t shaped like medieval court shoes back in the early 80s! But get this: as far as I can tell, the Ultimate 81s are no longer produced and Asics has replaced them with a carbon-copy “new look” model which seem identical in every way except one - yes, they are now bullet-shaped! It’s crazymaking!

      For the sake of sanity (and budget) I’ve decided to give up and go with the flow. Currently rocking a pair of Under Armour which are un-foot-shaped and ugly as hell but comfortable enough.

      • @IMALlama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        13 hours ago

        And there is now so little choice!

        There has been a consolidation of the major brands, but there’s a pretty solid niche market around foot shaped shoes.

        Vibrams are the extreme. Birkenstock sneakers are pretty well shaped, but their soles are a bit rigid. I don’t mean that in a comfort way, I mean that in a bendable way.

        More recent, to me at least, entrants are groundies, xero shoes, Barebarics, belenka, and a ton more.

        • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          13 hours ago

          To clarify, I’m in Europe. None of these brands are available in shops, you’d have to order them.

          Just the way you guys are reeling off all these names is so American! Reminds me of the trope of asking advice on the internet. “What should I use to clean my shower?” - Americans will list 10 brand-names, Europeans will say “bleach”. :)

          • Flubo
            link
            fedilink
            Deutsch
            12 hours ago

            But there is a lot oft Brands oft barefoot shoes (in Europe) that nowadays dont look ugly anymore and some Brands offer sneakers.