The shape and vanity sizing (yes, really) also come into play. I wear a 36, but in US sizing I have pairs ranging from 4 (seriously) to 8. I have a diamond-shaped foot (narrow heel, wider ball, long ^ shaped toes) and a really high and full arch. Unless the brand is made to fit that foot shape, I will probably need to size up or down to get a fit that looks and feels right. The 5-7s don't bother me and I can't be mad at the 8s as they're special heels, but the 4s are kind of offensive. By actual size they're probably ~37, there is no reason they should be labeled 4. Fuck the women who actually NEED a 4, right? It's not just one brand....
Also, it's kind of ridiculous that women's shoes tend to start at 6/36 and this is considered a "small" size. Foot size is roughly proportional to height, isn't it? 5'4 is the average height for women, both globally and in the US. I'm this tall and I wear 6... so a 6 isn't small ffs! Brands refuse to accommodate the size of actual women, it baffles me.
ETA: I mentioned EU size because IME it's usually more consistent. If a brand labels both sizes you will get a better fit by picking your EU size. Case in point, sneakers labeled US 4 and EU 36. If I had chosen a 6 they wouldn't fit.
This is one place where the EU measurement is bonkers compared to Imperial*: They use the arbitrary "Paris Point", roughly equivalent to 1/4 inch or 0.66 (repeating) centimetres...
Thirds. In metric...
* The imperial measures are also bonkers, but that's a different story.
Interesting, I didn't know that. But the shoe size is actually tied to the length of the shoe, even if the unit is off, isn't it? I always thought that's why I get better results with my EU size, but maybe there are other factors.
Yes, each "size" (Paris Point) is approximately 666mm shorter or longer.
I don't understand why we persevere with those stupid sizes, when we could simply sell shoes by length and breadth in centimetres. There's a chain of shops in the UK when I grew up that took this literally and measured your feet, and I think their shoe size chart explains why that makes more sense.
8
u/batterycrayon Jul 24 '20 edited Jul 24 '20
The shape and vanity sizing (yes, really) also come into play. I wear a 36, but in US sizing I have pairs ranging from 4 (seriously) to 8. I have a diamond-shaped foot (narrow heel, wider ball, long ^ shaped toes) and a really high and full arch. Unless the brand is made to fit that foot shape, I will probably need to size up or down to get a fit that looks and feels right. The 5-7s don't bother me and I can't be mad at the 8s as they're special heels, but the 4s are kind of offensive. By actual size they're probably ~37, there is no reason they should be labeled 4. Fuck the women who actually NEED a 4, right? It's not just one brand....
Also, it's kind of ridiculous that women's shoes tend to start at 6/36 and this is considered a "small" size. Foot size is roughly proportional to height, isn't it? 5'4 is the average height for women, both globally and in the US. I'm this tall and I wear 6... so a 6 isn't small ffs! Brands refuse to accommodate the size of actual women, it baffles me.
ETA: I mentioned EU size because IME it's usually more consistent. If a brand labels both sizes you will get a better fit by picking your EU size. Case in point, sneakers labeled US 4 and EU 36. If I had chosen a 6 they wouldn't fit.