I have babouches from the hipster store. The back is actually SEWN down...

My husband's favorite casual shoes for summer are Olukai and a lot of their shoes are designed that way so this doesn't look odd to me.

Mr Maximal has these casual house shoes. Despite his initial aversion to the flipped-down option, now wears them both ways.

Picture won't attach, hmmph.

Or, what Susie said!

I'm going to be very succinct about it. I don't find this trend cute, fun or comfortable. Wear a mule instead of ruining the backs of your shoes.

I can't believe people do that.

Yes, I know that some of these shoes are designed to be folded down, but I bet they still get wrecked really easily. And even if they don't, I still think it's a goofy look. Why not just wear mules?

(@LisaP -- yet again we differ in opinion over shoes. I still think my rainbow puke running shoes are the ugliest things ever!) ;-P

It's a marmite reaction! This doesn't make sense to me to do this to lovely shoes.

Yup - everyone has , and is entitled to her own opinion

And apparently I'm way out on left field , according to this blog. As long as I've been an active participant on this forum, I've never seen such a definitive and negative statement made against a certain look/trend. I suppose at some point you will reach the point where the point of view of a blog doesn't jive with yours, and you move on.

Yikes! My mum does this though....always has. She finds soft leather shoes and then ruins the backs by wearing them this way.

In her defense, mules were NOT easy to find all these years. And she has a medical condition wherein her feet are almost always swollen (actually her leg is from the knee down due to bad circulation) so she finds this comfortable. At least for shoes she wears around the house. Now that mules are easy to find again, I did get her 2 pairs of soft mules she can wear at home.

Hah, maybe it's a great way to recycle my small/not fitting loafers like this!:-) (Oh and OluKai would be the most comfy shoes around the house for my Hubby too-brilliant ideea!!!)

I believe this is quite common in some parts of the world and the original babouche house shoe - which I run across regularly - is worn this way intentionally. I don't have a problem with it at all when the shoe is designed to be worn like this, although I wouldn't suggest doing it with stiff shoes.

I bought a pair of shoes specially designed to be convertible, like the ones in the article. I haven't worn them as mules yet, but now I think I better give it a whirl, just to be contrary

No, I will not be following this trend. It looks neither elegant nor comfortable in my opinion, so I'm giving it a wide berth.

Eep! Nope, this is not for me.

A little more broken-back shoe support! But still an overwhelming no from most of ya.

The reason this bugs me so much is that the shoes pictured in that article look really expensive, so the message one sends by wearing them with the backs all stepped on is one of flamboyant privilege. (This is true whether or not they are actually designed to be stepped on). I mentioned this in my initial comment, and Gaylene remarked on it too. It says, "Look, I'm intentionally destroying my lovely Gucci shoes that cost as much as a week's salary for the average joe". I've no problem with people owning Gucci shoes, but ruining them publicly and deliberately shows a sort of tone-deafness with respect to the state of the modern world, in which the divide between the rich and the poor grows ever wider.

A kid stepping on the backs of her cheap keds because she's so focused on getting outside to play that she can't be bothered to put them on right, or a woman stepping on the backs of her old house slipper/shoes, is something else altogether. While I wouldn't do it myself, I think it's fine. Though in the case of the kid, her parent will probably tell her off because it's their job to teacher her that you don't treat shoes that way.

I don't know -- if someone less-privileged got ahold of pair of Gucci shoes, they might very well wear them with the heels stepped on. I just don't see it as a class thing at all. It's just a way some people like to wear shoes.

Aziraphale, you've articulated my discomfort very well. It's not the look itself--which I don't see as much different than the distressed jean look, frankly--but the tone-deafness of privilege Implied by publicly trashing a item which is out of reach for most people. Even kings and emperors understood the need to restraint themselves from such displays or risk losing their heads.

A shoe designed to be worn this way is a different story; like a pair of shredded jeans, I can like it or leave it on the shelf. Same goes for an item which needs to be modified for comfort like cutting the waistband of a pair of expensive jeans to allow a person to keep wearing them during pregnancy. Playing around with less iconic items is also OK in my books--fashion demands, and rewards, that kind of creativity. But I do think there are boundaries when my privileges outpace the majority of people with whom I interact on a daily basis. Flaunting privilege is never fashionable in my books.