Apparently I have two pot roasts at the end of my legs of such unimaginable enormity that no low-cost shoe designer would ever deign to make affordable shoes in my size, lest I be the only person who buys them.
Does anyone else have this problem? Or are my feet really that wide?
1 comment:
There isn't any standard for what wide width means in women's shoes. Men's have a choice of widths, but we have to guess.
My everyday ugly shoes are Thom McAn from K-Mart and they cost around twenty bucks. The wide width are really generously sized so you can wear your actual shoe size without going up one to accomodate width. They really are ugly: loafers, tassels, wedge heel made of rubber. Still, they have a decent insole with some support. They come in black or brown. Have I mentioned how ugly they are? Yeah.
SAS comfort shoes also run very wide, but they are uglier than the Thom McAn loafers and are much more expensive.
Maybe I could make tiny stickers for the back of the heels that read:
"My other shoes are Bass Wejuns."
Post a Comment