or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Shoe insecurities
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shoe insecurities

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
I'm having a couple of insecurities about shoes that I'd like opinions on. First, I have a couple of pairs (one more than I need, but they are slightly different) of gucci bit loafers (nickel bit), but a young female friend said that look is dated. (They are from 2002, and similar to current styles.) The salesman at Neiman Marcus says it's a classic look. Oh, I am forty-something (and have stopped posting to the gq list, because that seems to be 20 year-olds). What do you all think? Other look is the monk strap, which I used to like quite a bit but see less now, and haven't worn in a couple of years. Finally, I'm looking for a comfortable brown shoe to wear with jeans during the summer. (Probably lace-ups, b/c I have a decent pair of driving mocs already.) I'd be grateful for any recommendations. Thanks. Oh, I probably have about 12 pairs of shoes.
post #2 of 14
I would think that being an older gentleman you don't have to chase the very latest, up to date trends in shoes. That's better left to the 20-somethings and under. Besides your shoes are only 2 to 3 years old, and men's fashion doesn't move as fast in trends as women's does anyways. Now if you want to be more modern (trendy) and not so "classic" then by all means use what she said as an excuse to get some new shoes. Though it is only her opinion. What I would recommend is when you still wear them out ask other women what they think of them. I would bet you'd get a lot more compliments then negative remarks. You could also ask your friend what she thinks would be a good shoe with jeans for maybe she has some good taste. Just some ideas. . .
post #3 of 14
The Gucci bit loafer is a classic look, which I would wear confidently if I were you. The monk strap, too, will set you apart as stylish. I say wear both with confidence.
post #4 of 14
Perhaps it makes me a tool, but I've always liked the look of the Gucci bit loafer. I've always liked monkstrap shoes, and I know that that doesn't make me a tool. I'll pay attention to what (some) women have to say about color matching, but that's about it. It has been my experience that women who opine about men's clothing think they know a lot more than they actually do. I also rarely pay attention to a salesman who assures me that a certain item is classic. It just so happens that the salesman is right in this case.
post #5 of 14
If it is the classic Gucci bit loafer then you can't go wrong. They look great. Absolutely one of the most versatile shoes you can own. And monk-straps are my second favorite shoe design after Norwegians.
post #6 of 14
i'm with jcusey on this one. most women don't know about clothes at all, let alone menswear. they only know "what's hot this season" from looking at magazines. if you trust your girlfriend chances are you'll be wearing something that's trendy now but will be out of style in six months. i'll bet a lot of the guys on this forum could do a much better job of dressing your girlfriend than she does. btw, i like bit loafers too.
post #7 of 14
Thread Starter 
Thanks guys. I feel much better.
post #8 of 14
Wearing Gucci bit loafers does carry certain connotations (as does wearing sneakers). Whether you are prepared to live with that is up to you. Both your female friend and the salesman are correct. The bit loafer is an older man's shoe (either that, or you are a real rockstar, and you don't sound like one.) And it is also a classic. You're not going to see too many scenesters walking around in bit loafers. I've seen a fair number of gay men and a certain stripe of hiphopper walking around with plain loafers (usually tan) recently, but not too many bit loafers. As for the salesman at Neimans - he is correct as well. The loafer is a classic shoe - just not a particularly popular one (at least not in the U.S.) right now. As for shoes to wear with jeans - I think that a desert style boot (like a Clark desert boot) with a Crepe sole, is the best bet. Classier than (my beloved) sneakers, and less fussy than those expensive sneaker/shoe hybrid deals.
post #9 of 14
I have a pair of choclate brown bit Gucci loafers in a driving shoe style from Neiman Marcus: http://www.neimanmarcus.com/store....&cmCat= They look nothing like old man shoes. In fact, they are TRUMP TIGHT. I think the bit is very current right now from a "fashion" perspective. As evidence, I point to all the Ferregamos, Bruno Maglis, etc. imitating the look. M#4
post #10 of 14
I agree with the positive comments on the Gucci bit loafer. It's a classic, elegant style. Without fail, those I see wearing them are well-dressed, sophisticated, wealthy-looking men. Gucci makes some shoes (OK, lots of shoes) that I think are ugly and ridiculously trendy. Not the bit loafers though. I can see how some women might think they are too staid or conservative or lawyerly -- just like some women favor guys who wear those god-awful, huge, clunky, square-toed battleaxe shoes or those pointy-tipped boots with silver tips on the two ends, perhaps in lime-green gator skin. Stick to your guns. Wear the monkstraps too.
post #11 of 14
I guess that my point was that the Gucci bit loafer is really an uptown, more conservative, look, and not so much a downtown look, given conventional clothing/shoe combinations. If you are comfortable with this - good for you. Of course, you could always pair Gucci bit loafers with beat up jeans and a tee-shirt and a pinstripe canvas jacket, and I doubt that your female friend would have the same comments. Are you sure that your female friend is not trying to tell you something else? On a completely different note, Neiman's, and Saks to a lesser degree, are really bothersome to me. Only now have they gotten on the knit cap, dark or distressed jeans, white (or light colored) sneakers deal. And striped shirts. And Paul Smith. Why are they so far behind the curve, constantly? Of the large high end chains, I think that only Barney's has consistently had the cojones to consistently stock merchandise that hasn't been featured in GQ.
post #12 of 14
It all depends what sort look that you are after. I am not big fan of anything pointy or rounded front shoes. I think it looks too un-sleek. Thus the younger ladie who is a friend of yours may be right, and ladies do notice males shoes 1st. However, not all ladies have good fashion sense anyways.. I would get a 2nd opinion from other ladies
post #13 of 14
That Gucci snaffle bit loafer is a classic as has been mentioned several times. I wouldn't say that many Gucci shoes are ugly but certain ones are. However they do have for their S/S collection a rather nice looking loafer with an update snaffle bit, and a sleeker pointed toeline. Almost a chisel toe. I believe Gucci has a bespoke service available.
Quote:
I am not big fan of anything pointy or rounded front shoes.  I think it looks too un-sleek.
Shouldn't pointed toe shoes be more sleek? I.e. Sergio Rossi, and Paciotti shoes to cite some of the more well known manufacturers of pointed shoes.
post #14 of 14
I don't see how any of those square-toed monstrosities can in any way be construed as "sleek".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Shoe insecurities