One aspect not well defined in the article is that pointe shoes for professional dancers are tailored items, needing to meet a very specific, individual profile.
The shoes that many professional dancers use are hand crafted and heavily customized/made to order for each dancer, who then proceeds to make their own set of adjustments to the delivered shoe:
https://www.freedoflondon.com/pointe-shoes/
Ballet is a high precision art form (think playing the violin with your whole body), with different roles/ parts having different requirements for shoes. The shoes are modified to fit each role, some needing a more pliable shoe, and some needing a firmer one. In this case the fact that the shoes can degrade and are able to be tuned/ molded to the need of the current production is a desired trait.
However the takeaway is that it's a high precision, variable environment and shoes that can't meet the required operating window aren't useful (either from degradation or design, think tires on a racecar).
In regards to newer types of shoes, them being more dependable and longer lasting also makes them less customizable by the dancer - improving their longevity fixes their useful window to a specific operating range.
Many of the other arguments are indeed correct - however no product offers the individual tailoring a master craftsman can offer on a platform flexible enough for heavy modding that's better than the current favorites.
Some generalizing on my part however IMO this is the crux of the issue in terms of resistance to adoption of new production techniques/ materials
Avery Trufelman does an incredibly well-researched podcast on clothing of all kinds by the name of Articles of Interest. They did a whole show on the pointe shoe. You can check it out here: https://articlesofinterest.substack.com/p/on-pointe
I've seen the pictures of ballerinas' toes -- in this era of 3D printing is there no way to distribute the load up to where the foot widens into the heel?
> In 2023, the German company act’ble released a 3-D-printed and knit shoe, act’Pointe. The shoe features a scored sole made from a rubber-like elastomer and a compressive “skin” that covers the entire foot.
> Dancers are taught to make everything look a certain way. There has been innovation in ballet, but always in a small angle, and in a very rigid system
> No matter how comfortable or functional, unconventional shoe designs tend to be a hard sell in the ballet community—often because they look different, featuring nontraditional materials or shapes.
The act’Pointe shoes look good IMO and they do precisely what you suggest. Not sure how well they sell given what they say Re: the culture being rigid on choice. If they don't sell well, it could be a cultural problem or one of affordability if it's e.g. patented.
I think the affordability would depend on how long they last. I watched a pretty lengthy video on point shoes once. They were decently expensive and almost disposable. They do not last long, especially for professionals. I think they said some might just last a day.
There is also a whole process of customization, where the dancers spend quite a bit of time bending the shoes to their will and tweaking them to their liking.
I’d the 3D printed ones don’t last long enough to make up the price difference, or can’t be tweaked and tuned in the same way, those could both be problems.
I’d also imagine if a dancer learned in one style of shoe, they may just be comfortable with it… like Linus Torvalds maintaining an ancient obscure version of uemacs, just because that’s where is muscle memory and comfort zone is.
This is an interesting dynamic with a number of elements in play which might have carry-over to other realms of new technology adoption (or resistance):
- A small and specialised market.
- Numerous gatekeepers, each of whom might exert a veto (dancers, teachers, company directors, etc.).
- Highly subjective judging criteria, with benefits or limitations of alternatives not being evident possibly for a long time.
- A high level of highly-interdependent skills. A dancer's performance literally turns on her shoes, and a whole set of muscle-memory, training, technique, and expectations are based on a familiar product. Changing this is probably anxiety-producing.
- Careers are relatively short, lasting perhaps 10--20 years, rarely longer. Taking big risks on equipment may have low appeal.
Balancing all of this, if there does turn out to be some spectacular advantage to new kit, it's possible that change could happen rapidly. This has been the case elsewhere in the sports world. Shoes for runners, footballers (world or American, take your pick), swimmer's costumes, skiing equipment, etc., have all changed radically over the past 50 years (and were changing well before that). Ballet has strong traditions, but those might well bend.
If you're looking at this from a tech-adoption / tech-rejection / product-management hat, you might consider what the landscapes you're facing or contemplating look like relative to the ballet world, which conditions are similar or different. Small markets might be more resistant to change, though if there's fierce and unambiguous performance differentiation you might have an edge. Vetocracy is a concept gaining awareness in numerous disciplines. Highly-gate-kept or regulated fields tend to advance more slowly. Tightly-coupled systems evolve less quickly than loosely-coupled ones. Long run-times, careers, or organisational viability might allow for greater risk taking, or at least the opportunity for new entrants to launch trying different tools.
While we’re on the topic, on the last year, NPR interviewed an expert who warned of lifelong debilitating injury (pain walking) that dancers developed by going en pointe too young. The woman recommended waiting until 15. But searching for this to share with dancers, I cannot find the interview now. Did NPR retract this?
While growth plates close at this time (~13-15), in preprofessional training it's more usual to start from about 12. Basically,one's feet need to be strong enough to protect growing bones from permanent damage, thus safely starting pointework has more to do with having enough strength from previous training (2+ years) than fully closed growth plates.
For more information:
https://www.ortho.wustl.edu/content/Patient-Care/3496/Servic...
Yep, that’s what happened to my wife… she started rhythmic gymnastic and ballet at 4 in Eastern Europe in the 90s with a brutal coach, had to stop at 12 for an injury, and she has been having chronic pain and arthritis since she was 17. Anything taken to the extreme can have lifelong consequences.
Reminder that coach is not your friend, the incentives are wrong. If they burn through 100 kids damaging them for life, and one survives to win an Olympic medal, that’s what counts as success.
I don't recall NPR, but I do recall an interview with one of the US Olympic team doctors who has done extensive work on pointe and dance-related injuries.
Yep, even dancers who go on point later end up with injuries and issues like arthritis. It’s really that point is a bad idea, period. It’s an archaic holdover. For some reason people don’t view it negatively like foot binding.
I can't watch ballet. I actually, not figuratively, cringe when they do en pointe. It's like watching somebody cut themselves or even be in situations where they might, like an amateur youtube cook chopping unsafely; just physically and psychologically too uncomfortable for me. I don't have a problem with blood or injuries, per se; watching a surgical operation is tolerable, as long as I believe it's not actually painful. Maybe if I forced myself to watch enough ballet I'd learn to accept it's not that painful during the performance (is it?), but it'd take more effort than I care to put into it. Something about discrete, focused pain just triggers me. I also have to look away when getting my blood drawn or given a shot, and don't want to watch others getting the needle, either.
Conversely, I think one of the reasons some people are mesmerized by en pointe is the idea of it being painful, in the moment or at least the training/practice, and the manifest dedication involved.
You are making it weirder still by trying to defend your bias by saying it’s a problem with society. You are the one who called soccer a male sport. And now for some reason you are trotting out tropes about female soccer players being lesbians. Why?
There is no sentence in this post that makes sense. “Women aren’t sports stars”, “only lesbians get CTE or whatever”, “I can’t have deeply bizarre takes about women’s sports because I have daughters”
Nobody talked about any of these things man and you’re incoherent and/or wrong about all of them.
Like normally it is pointless to evaluate word salad on whether it’s factual or not but it’s like you put a bunch of those fridge magnets with words on them in a bag, shook it up and dumped it on the floor, and somehow they all randomly managed to assemble into legible but only wrong statements
There is no 'we'. There are different values that value different things.
Slave values = sacrificing yourself is noble and good.
Aristocracy values = being born an aristocrat is noble and good.
Trader values = enriching oneself is noble and good.
Religious fundamentalist values = following the one and only book is good.
Little girl/consumer values = my emotions are good.
Etc.
Slave and religious values are being replaced by trader and little girl/consumer values.
Boys embody slave or trader values. Girls embody little girl/consumer values.
Boys go to war, girls are little princesses. Ballet/women's pro sports are a niche for the few women who embody slave values. Most embody little girl/consumer values.
I think it's more that the male-dominant sports are billion dollar industries driven by deep-seated cultures of masculinity that view safety as weakness, and spectatorship that wants to see violence. No one watches ballet wanting to hear the sound of the dancers' skulls colliding.
They do watch for the en pointe, which is beautiful precisely because it's not something we expect bodies to be able to do. And the pain and injury risk also, I think, adds to the effect. I don't think it's all that different from what people experience seeing heads or bodies getting slammed, except en pointe is feminine coded (graceful) whereas slamming is masculine coded (brutish). Similarly, silent, hidden pain (feminine) versus pain as spectacle (masculine).
Can you give us anything more to go on as to where or how you heard this?
Was it NPR specifically, or your local NPR affiliate?
Keep in mind that "NPR" programming often consists of actual network programming, independent works distributed by NPR, and productions from either affiliated subnetworks (e.g., "MPR", Minnesota Public Radio, PRI/PRX, APM), and in cases individual affiliate stations (WBUR, WAMU, WNYC, WHYY, KQED, KOUW, KUTX, KCRW, etc.), or other noncommercial radio networks (e.g., Pacifica). And increasingly podcasting networks.
Using NPR's site search, the most recent story focusing on a specific ballerina's injury story is from 2017, on Fresh Air (WHYY) "From Injury To Recovery, A Ballerina Fought To Retire On Her Own Terms" <https://www.npr.org/2017/07/10/536434340/from-injury-to-reco...>. It's possible that that replayed more recently. Or that you're loosely anchored in time.
My memory was that this was an NPR story, the local affiliate has distinct production values that I believe I would have noticed. However, even searching the local affiliate's site only yielded the stories you referenced.
My only other suggestion is that stories often get shopped around and carried by multiple outlets. If you're anything like me, "the past year" might actually be the past five years, or more. There's often a study, book, institute, or specific investigator/doctor behind the story. If you really want to track down the story you might try broadening your search on those dimensions. (Or others which come to mind.)
And on that topic, our cultures default to shoes that press your big toe in, creating bunions in everyone predisposed to bunions. Just because we think it's cute when a shoe is rounded.
You have to specifically look for shoes that don't do it.
IMHO, the primary thing you want to look for is "wide toebox shoes", though I just got a second pair of Whitin and they are my primary day-to-day shoe.
I've got massive bunions and I remember as a kid (in the '70s-80s) that shoes for my big feet seemed to come in one width no matter the length. A size 8 and a size 10 seemed to be about the same width, the 10s just looked clownishly long. It was like I was wearing canoes on my feet.
I have giant bunions which thankfully don't bother me unless I put them in the wrong shoe, then every step is a world of pain. Finally in my mid-50s I was like "Wait, what is this 'wide toebox' shoe, that sounds like just the ticket. And it absolutely was.
Pro tip: Unless you have a narrow foot, try a cheap wide toebox shoe.
That doesn't mean it has to gratify your curiosity or mine - no single article can do that for everyone. But it's clear that that's what makes the article on topic.
One other aspect: the best HN submissions are the ones that are most uncorrelated with anything else that's gotten attention recently - or, as I used to put it, can't be predicted from any existing sequence*. This one has that property for sure!
Hi dang, sorry to ping you here again. I emailed back about a week ago but haven't heard back. My posts are still showing up as [dead] immediately after submission even with non-dev.to URLs. Would appreciate it if you could take a look when you get a chance. Thanks!
Well-made leather shoes have none of those drawbacks (besides polishing; nothing to do about that). When I was in high school my grandmother bought me a pair of (eye-wateringly expensive, partially hand-made) dress shoes. I can remember the style (dance-Oxford), but not the maker. I wore them for graduation, and then for another decade of restaurant and catering work. I regularly spent 10+ hours in a day in them, walking I don't know how far, and they were (with a soft-gel insole inside) as comfortable as a pair of sneakers - though indeed, not so good for running. I think I replaced the soles twice, before too much restaurant-damage on the uppers forced their retirement. More than 20 years after their demise, and I still miss them.
I don't think the raw material shoes are made of is that important. If their shape is correct and you size them right, they should be fine.
Shoes with a narrow toebox (pretty much all of them, except the ones that specifically advertise as being wide) should be considered extreme body modification IMO. Fine if that's what you're into, but most of the population should not be subjected to that.
Football (soccer) boots tend to be extremely narrow. Part of the reason is to keep the foot firm in it, but I suspect a lot of players would benefit from wider boxes.
Climbing boots are another interesting one. I can't wear most brands at all. I have settled on Scarpa as they tend to be wider. A lot of climbers have a tendency to downsize them massively though, and I honestly don't know how they do that. I have been purchasing them at least at my street size, and the next pair I get will be a whole number up. Not because they're just uncomfortable, but rather because they're nearly impossible to get in otherwise. I do wish I'd find wider toeboxes though, so I could get a pair that fits tight, but not torture tight.
Skiing is another one like climbing. Its only recently where higher volumes and wider forefoots are available, and they still try to tell you to go a size down.
Red Wings apparently have some Munson lasts, mentioned when I was investigating the topic earlier, though I don't know for which models or if they match what you're looking for.
They have an excellent quality reputation, though new boots are spendy. Used show up occasionally.
Brands such as Rolling Dub Trio and John Lofgren use Munson lasts that closely resemble the original shape; other makers, such as Nicks Boots, Viberg, and Iron Boots have lasts that draw direct inspiration from that shape.
From reading about the leather shoes are supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread. And I think they actually do last much longer than modern shoes made from synthetic materials, which you can’t really care for.
And they’re supposed to mold to your foot.
I feel like everyone is reading "leather shoe" and interpreting it as "dress shoe," but tennis shoes/trainers are usually leather, too. Sandals, moccasins, etc. Leather is a material. My ON running shoes are leather. My legit hiking shoes are leather. So are the kung fu shoes I used twenty years ago to fly through the fucking air with swords.
Almost all my dozen or so pairs of shoes and boots are leather and the only of these that I find true is that they’re not great for running. At least none of the ones I have.
If they fit poorly, you bought the wrong size or a pair made from a last that is very wrong for you. Ditto if they hurt your feet. Past a the first 3-4 wears of break-in neither of those should be true, they should fit and feel awesome. They’ll shrink if you soak them in water, and I mean soak, but even that’s usually not fatal to them, they’ll stretch back out. I have a beater pair of camp moccasins that I’ve straight-up walked down a waist-deep river in three times, and I regularly wear them for kayaking and briefly submerge them when getting in and out, and they still fit fine.
Also you don’t need to polish most of them. Hit ‘em with leather soap and conditioner a couple times a year if you want them to last a decade-plus, yes. Polish? That’s only necessary for certain types of shoes for certain purposes, and even then, you shouldn’t need to do it all the time or anything. I don’t put polish on any of mine.
(All this void if we’re talking reconstructed or fake leather like most of the “leather” shoes at the median Macy’s or other common department store, those are terrible, yeah)
None of these things are true about the material. They're all true of poorly-made shoes.
Also that's a very broad category. "Leather shoes." That's like nearly every dress and athletic shoe that exists. IT's all traditional moccasins. IT's a lot of the best sandals, which certainly don't have any of the problems you've listed.
One aspect not well defined in the article is that pointe shoes for professional dancers are tailored items, needing to meet a very specific, individual profile. The shoes that many professional dancers use are hand crafted and heavily customized/made to order for each dancer, who then proceeds to make their own set of adjustments to the delivered shoe: https://www.freedoflondon.com/pointe-shoes/ Ballet is a high precision art form (think playing the violin with your whole body), with different roles/ parts having different requirements for shoes. The shoes are modified to fit each role, some needing a more pliable shoe, and some needing a firmer one. In this case the fact that the shoes can degrade and are able to be tuned/ molded to the need of the current production is a desired trait. However the takeaway is that it's a high precision, variable environment and shoes that can't meet the required operating window aren't useful (either from degradation or design, think tires on a racecar). In regards to newer types of shoes, them being more dependable and longer lasting also makes them less customizable by the dancer - improving their longevity fixes their useful window to a specific operating range. Many of the other arguments are indeed correct - however no product offers the individual tailoring a master craftsman can offer on a platform flexible enough for heavy modding that's better than the current favorites. Some generalizing on my part however IMO this is the crux of the issue in terms of resistance to adoption of new production techniques/ materials
Avery Trufelman does an incredibly well-researched podcast on clothing of all kinds by the name of Articles of Interest. They did a whole show on the pointe shoe. You can check it out here: https://articlesofinterest.substack.com/p/on-pointe
She's one of the best among the 99PI alums.
I've seen the pictures of ballerinas' toes -- in this era of 3D printing is there no way to distribute the load up to where the foot widens into the heel?
> In 2023, the German company act’ble released a 3-D-printed and knit shoe, act’Pointe. The shoe features a scored sole made from a rubber-like elastomer and a compressive “skin” that covers the entire foot.
> Dancers are taught to make everything look a certain way. There has been innovation in ballet, but always in a small angle, and in a very rigid system
> No matter how comfortable or functional, unconventional shoe designs tend to be a hard sell in the ballet community—often because they look different, featuring nontraditional materials or shapes.
The act’Pointe shoes look good IMO and they do precisely what you suggest. Not sure how well they sell given what they say Re: the culture being rigid on choice. If they don't sell well, it could be a cultural problem or one of affordability if it's e.g. patented.
I think the affordability would depend on how long they last. I watched a pretty lengthy video on point shoes once. They were decently expensive and almost disposable. They do not last long, especially for professionals. I think they said some might just last a day.
There is also a whole process of customization, where the dancers spend quite a bit of time bending the shoes to their will and tweaking them to their liking.
I’d the 3D printed ones don’t last long enough to make up the price difference, or can’t be tweaked and tuned in the same way, those could both be problems.
I’d also imagine if a dancer learned in one style of shoe, they may just be comfortable with it… like Linus Torvalds maintaining an ancient obscure version of uemacs, just because that’s where is muscle memory and comfort zone is.
This is an interesting dynamic with a number of elements in play which might have carry-over to other realms of new technology adoption (or resistance):
- A small and specialised market.
- Numerous gatekeepers, each of whom might exert a veto (dancers, teachers, company directors, etc.).
- Highly subjective judging criteria, with benefits or limitations of alternatives not being evident possibly for a long time.
- A high level of highly-interdependent skills. A dancer's performance literally turns on her shoes, and a whole set of muscle-memory, training, technique, and expectations are based on a familiar product. Changing this is probably anxiety-producing.
- Careers are relatively short, lasting perhaps 10--20 years, rarely longer. Taking big risks on equipment may have low appeal.
Balancing all of this, if there does turn out to be some spectacular advantage to new kit, it's possible that change could happen rapidly. This has been the case elsewhere in the sports world. Shoes for runners, footballers (world or American, take your pick), swimmer's costumes, skiing equipment, etc., have all changed radically over the past 50 years (and were changing well before that). Ballet has strong traditions, but those might well bend.
If you're looking at this from a tech-adoption / tech-rejection / product-management hat, you might consider what the landscapes you're facing or contemplating look like relative to the ballet world, which conditions are similar or different. Small markets might be more resistant to change, though if there's fierce and unambiguous performance differentiation you might have an edge. Vetocracy is a concept gaining awareness in numerous disciplines. Highly-gate-kept or regulated fields tend to advance more slowly. Tightly-coupled systems evolve less quickly than loosely-coupled ones. Long run-times, careers, or organisational viability might allow for greater risk taking, or at least the opportunity for new entrants to launch trying different tools.
While we’re on the topic, on the last year, NPR interviewed an expert who warned of lifelong debilitating injury (pain walking) that dancers developed by going en pointe too young. The woman recommended waiting until 15. But searching for this to share with dancers, I cannot find the interview now. Did NPR retract this?
While growth plates close at this time (~13-15), in preprofessional training it's more usual to start from about 12. Basically,one's feet need to be strong enough to protect growing bones from permanent damage, thus safely starting pointework has more to do with having enough strength from previous training (2+ years) than fully closed growth plates. For more information: https://www.ortho.wustl.edu/content/Patient-Care/3496/Servic...
Yep, that’s what happened to my wife… she started rhythmic gymnastic and ballet at 4 in Eastern Europe in the 90s with a brutal coach, had to stop at 12 for an injury, and she has been having chronic pain and arthritis since she was 17. Anything taken to the extreme can have lifelong consequences.
Reminder that coach is not your friend, the incentives are wrong. If they burn through 100 kids damaging them for life, and one survives to win an Olympic medal, that’s what counts as success.
I don't recall NPR, but I do recall an interview with one of the US Olympic team doctors who has done extensive work on pointe and dance-related injuries.
see: https://selinashah.com/press/interviews/
Yep, even dancers who go on point later end up with injuries and issues like arthritis. It’s really that point is a bad idea, period. It’s an archaic holdover. For some reason people don’t view it negatively like foot binding.
I can't watch ballet. I actually, not figuratively, cringe when they do en pointe. It's like watching somebody cut themselves or even be in situations where they might, like an amateur youtube cook chopping unsafely; just physically and psychologically too uncomfortable for me. I don't have a problem with blood or injuries, per se; watching a surgical operation is tolerable, as long as I believe it's not actually painful. Maybe if I forced myself to watch enough ballet I'd learn to accept it's not that painful during the performance (is it?), but it'd take more effort than I care to put into it. Something about discrete, focused pain just triggers me. I also have to look away when getting my blood drawn or given a shot, and don't want to watch others getting the needle, either.
Conversely, I think one of the reasons some people are mesmerized by en pointe is the idea of it being painful, in the moment or at least the training/practice, and the manifest dedication involved.
[flagged]
Do we?
Never heard of this ballet thing til now. Have heard plenty of rumblings about headers in youth soccer. For both boys and girls.
Male dancers and female athletes exist…
“This smacks of misogyny!” I say as I cross out “sports where players regularly sustain CTE-causing injuries” and write “boys”
https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/article/cte-concussion-wo...
“I’m so enlightened I forgot women play soccer” is definitely a weird take.
[flagged]
You are making it weirder still by trying to defend your bias by saying it’s a problem with society. You are the one who called soccer a male sport. And now for some reason you are trotting out tropes about female soccer players being lesbians. Why?
There is no sentence in this post that makes sense. “Women aren’t sports stars”, “only lesbians get CTE or whatever”, “I can’t have deeply bizarre takes about women’s sports because I have daughters”
Nobody talked about any of these things man and you’re incoherent and/or wrong about all of them.
Like normally it is pointless to evaluate word salad on whether it’s factual or not but it’s like you put a bunch of those fridge magnets with words on them in a bag, shook it up and dumped it on the floor, and somehow they all randomly managed to assemble into legible but only wrong statements
There is no 'we'. There are different values that value different things.
Slave values = sacrificing yourself is noble and good.
Aristocracy values = being born an aristocrat is noble and good.
Trader values = enriching oneself is noble and good.
Religious fundamentalist values = following the one and only book is good.
Little girl/consumer values = my emotions are good.
Etc.
Slave and religious values are being replaced by trader and little girl/consumer values.
Boys embody slave or trader values. Girls embody little girl/consumer values.
Boys go to war, girls are little princesses. Ballet/women's pro sports are a niche for the few women who embody slave values. Most embody little girl/consumer values.
Things in Galt’s Gulch must be pretty crazy since they put in wifi
I think it's more that the male-dominant sports are billion dollar industries driven by deep-seated cultures of masculinity that view safety as weakness, and spectatorship that wants to see violence. No one watches ballet wanting to hear the sound of the dancers' skulls colliding.
They do watch for the en pointe, which is beautiful precisely because it's not something we expect bodies to be able to do. And the pain and injury risk also, I think, adds to the effect. I don't think it's all that different from what people experience seeing heads or bodies getting slammed, except en pointe is feminine coded (graceful) whereas slamming is masculine coded (brutish). Similarly, silent, hidden pain (feminine) versus pain as spectacle (masculine).
Wait till you hear about an insane game called (US) football!
Okay, now attack boxing.
If anything, we’re reversing progress on this front, given we just had a UFC match on the front lawn of the White House.
Can you give us anything more to go on as to where or how you heard this?
Was it NPR specifically, or your local NPR affiliate?
Keep in mind that "NPR" programming often consists of actual network programming, independent works distributed by NPR, and productions from either affiliated subnetworks (e.g., "MPR", Minnesota Public Radio, PRI/PRX, APM), and in cases individual affiliate stations (WBUR, WAMU, WNYC, WHYY, KQED, KOUW, KUTX, KCRW, etc.), or other noncommercial radio networks (e.g., Pacifica). And increasingly podcasting networks.
Using NPR's site search, the most recent story focusing on a specific ballerina's injury story is from 2017, on Fresh Air (WHYY) "From Injury To Recovery, A Ballerina Fought To Retire On Her Own Terms" <https://www.npr.org/2017/07/10/536434340/from-injury-to-reco...>. It's possible that that replayed more recently. Or that you're loosely anchored in time.
There's a story more closely matching your description, though focusing on gymnastics, in USA Today, March 2026, "How two painful sports stories underscore girls' unique injury risks" <https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2026/03/08/girls-great...>
My memory was that this was an NPR story, the local affiliate has distinct production values that I believe I would have noticed. However, even searching the local affiliate's site only yielded the stories you referenced.
My only other suggestion is that stories often get shopped around and carried by multiple outlets. If you're anything like me, "the past year" might actually be the past five years, or more. There's often a study, book, institute, or specific investigator/doctor behind the story. If you really want to track down the story you might try broadening your search on those dimensions. (Or others which come to mind.)
Good luck!
And on that topic, our cultures default to shoes that press your big toe in, creating bunions in everyone predisposed to bunions. Just because we think it's cute when a shoe is rounded.
You have to specifically look for shoes that don't do it.
(I recommend Whitins on Amazon. $35 shoes.)
IMHO, the primary thing you want to look for is "wide toebox shoes", though I just got a second pair of Whitin and they are my primary day-to-day shoe.
I've got massive bunions and I remember as a kid (in the '70s-80s) that shoes for my big feet seemed to come in one width no matter the length. A size 8 and a size 10 seemed to be about the same width, the 10s just looked clownishly long. It was like I was wearing canoes on my feet.
I have giant bunions which thankfully don't bother me unless I put them in the wrong shoe, then every step is a world of pain. Finally in my mid-50s I was like "Wait, what is this 'wide toebox' shoe, that sounds like just the ticket. And it absolutely was.
Pro tip: Unless you have a narrow foot, try a cheap wide toebox shoe.
[dead]
[flagged]
> Speaking of shoes
Can you please avoid generic tangents? This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
"Shoes" is about as generic as one could get in a single hop from the topic.
Okay, fine, but how on earth is the posted article submission even on-topic for the site? And for the front page?
Anything that gratifies intellectual curiosity is on topic for HN! - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
That doesn't mean it has to gratify your curiosity or mine - no single article can do that for everyone. But it's clear that that's what makes the article on topic.
One other aspect: the best HN submissions are the ones that are most uncorrelated with anything else that's gotten attention recently - or, as I used to put it, can't be predicted from any existing sequence*. This one has that property for sure!
* https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Hi dang, sorry to ping you here again. I emailed back about a week ago but haven't heard back. My posts are still showing up as [dead] immediately after submission even with non-dev.to URLs. Would appreciate it if you could take a look when you get a chance. Thanks!
Well-made leather shoes have none of those drawbacks (besides polishing; nothing to do about that). When I was in high school my grandmother bought me a pair of (eye-wateringly expensive, partially hand-made) dress shoes. I can remember the style (dance-Oxford), but not the maker. I wore them for graduation, and then for another decade of restaurant and catering work. I regularly spent 10+ hours in a day in them, walking I don't know how far, and they were (with a soft-gel insole inside) as comfortable as a pair of sneakers - though indeed, not so good for running. I think I replaced the soles twice, before too much restaurant-damage on the uppers forced their retirement. More than 20 years after their demise, and I still miss them.
I don't think the raw material shoes are made of is that important. If their shape is correct and you size them right, they should be fine.
Shoes with a narrow toebox (pretty much all of them, except the ones that specifically advertise as being wide) should be considered extreme body modification IMO. Fine if that's what you're into, but most of the population should not be subjected to that.
I agree. The US Army already recognized this problem and developed the Munson last before WWI.
Some mid and high-end footwear brands produce boots with Munson or Munson-like lasts. It helps tremendously. I cannot go back to narrow toeboxes.
Oddly, lots of sports footwear suffers from the same issue and wide toeboxes are not as popular as they should be.
Sports footwear is interesting.
Football (soccer) boots tend to be extremely narrow. Part of the reason is to keep the foot firm in it, but I suspect a lot of players would benefit from wider boxes.
Climbing boots are another interesting one. I can't wear most brands at all. I have settled on Scarpa as they tend to be wider. A lot of climbers have a tendency to downsize them massively though, and I honestly don't know how they do that. I have been purchasing them at least at my street size, and the next pair I get will be a whole number up. Not because they're just uncomfortable, but rather because they're nearly impossible to get in otherwise. I do wish I'd find wider toeboxes though, so I could get a pair that fits tight, but not torture tight.
Skiing is another one like climbing. Its only recently where higher volumes and wider forefoots are available, and they still try to tell you to go a size down.
TIL: "How The Munson Last Revolutionized Military Footwear" <https://www.stitchdown.com/info/munson-last-origins/>.
Any recommendations for the brands? I am looking for Derbies and Chukka boots
Red Wings apparently have some Munson lasts, mentioned when I was investigating the topic earlier, though I don't know for which models or if they match what you're looking for.
They have an excellent quality reputation, though new boots are spendy. Used show up occasionally.
More:
Brands such as Rolling Dub Trio and John Lofgren use Munson lasts that closely resemble the original shape; other makers, such as Nicks Boots, Viberg, and Iron Boots have lasts that draw direct inspiration from that shape.
<https://www.stitchdown.com/info/munson-last-origins/>
There are also results from an online search, though prices are ... high. I'm seeing $600+ for boots advertised as built on Munson lasts.
From reading about the leather shoes are supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread. And I think they actually do last much longer than modern shoes made from synthetic materials, which you can’t really care for. And they’re supposed to mold to your foot.
The problems that you listed don't affect a lot of people in a way that they themselves might find meaningful.
Moreover, leather is a widely available product and a byproduct of the meat industry.
No shoes last longer than well fitting well made all leather shoes.
I feel like everyone is reading "leather shoe" and interpreting it as "dress shoe," but tennis shoes/trainers are usually leather, too. Sandals, moccasins, etc. Leather is a material. My ON running shoes are leather. My legit hiking shoes are leather. So are the kung fu shoes I used twenty years ago to fly through the fucking air with swords.
Leather shoes are shoes or boots made of leather, cork, and optionally steel and rubber. They last a really long time.
A shoe that has a leather upper and EVA foam makes up the rest of it is not a leather shoe. It’s a shoe with a leather upper.
Probably interpreting it that way because “bad for running” and “needs shoe polish” can’t possible be describing sports shoes with leather components.
Right. I'm taking personal offense to someone using "leather shoes" so inaccurately. :)
Almost all my dozen or so pairs of shoes and boots are leather and the only of these that I find true is that they’re not great for running. At least none of the ones I have.
If they fit poorly, you bought the wrong size or a pair made from a last that is very wrong for you. Ditto if they hurt your feet. Past a the first 3-4 wears of break-in neither of those should be true, they should fit and feel awesome. They’ll shrink if you soak them in water, and I mean soak, but even that’s usually not fatal to them, they’ll stretch back out. I have a beater pair of camp moccasins that I’ve straight-up walked down a waist-deep river in three times, and I regularly wear them for kayaking and briefly submerge them when getting in and out, and they still fit fine.
Also you don’t need to polish most of them. Hit ‘em with leather soap and conditioner a couple times a year if you want them to last a decade-plus, yes. Polish? That’s only necessary for certain types of shoes for certain purposes, and even then, you shouldn’t need to do it all the time or anything. I don’t put polish on any of mine.
(All this void if we’re talking reconstructed or fake leather like most of the “leather” shoes at the median Macy’s or other common department store, those are terrible, yeah)
There is probably a glut of leather.
Way ahead of you on that one (I don't put cow parts in my mouth, not going to put them on my feet either)
What?! I wore leather sport shoes for many years without any major issues. What should we use instead of leather?
None of these things are true about the material. They're all true of poorly-made shoes.
Also that's a very broad category. "Leather shoes." That's like nearly every dress and athletic shoe that exists. IT's all traditional moccasins. IT's a lot of the best sandals, which certainly don't have any of the problems you've listed.
[flagged]
It's interesting.
If you don't like a submission, flag it and move on. Meta discussion about suitability is boring and off-topic.
Is technology resistant to change? Also ironically the only shoe who iscthoroughly destroyed to made useful
The discussions about the resistance to change are useful to anyone who is trying to bring tech to the marketplace.
[flagged]