The shoes truly make the person: A Rebuttal

The shoes truly make the person - Opinion

Flip through the latest edition of The Santa Clara, SCU's university newspaper. Between articles about Jersey Shore and a prepubescent-toned article about crushes, you will find Katherine Chow's article entitled The Shoes Truly Make the Person. Read it. Then read it again. And, if you could possibly get through it, read it a third time. Because I'm shocked. I am absolutely floored that this, this is the standard of my university newspaper. That, with all of the possible opinions in the world to have, this girl's opinion is ..... shoes?

Now, please, don't misunderstand me. I understand what she's going for here. Shoes and appearance matter. Wearing a great outfit can make you feel like a million bucks. I'm not disputing that. What I take problem with is the superficial culture of Santa Clara University that this article perpetuates.

Even from the very first line of the article, Chow differentiates herself as a member of a higher socioeconomic status. From her tone, it is clear: those of you girls who can't afford the ballet flat, stiletto and Uggs (or, gasp, perhaps don't want or need these frivolous wardrobe additions) are excluded from this world. Chow separates each shoe into a narrow box of stereotype. Clearly, only funny girls wear Converse. Sexy girls wear stilettos. Confident girls wear ...Pumas. In Chow's black-and-white view of what each shoe "is", personality and confidence only comes from a shoe.

Okay. Let's back up here. Personality comes from...a shoe? Isn't that exactly what commercial America wants you to think? That if -- and only if -- you buy this specific product, you will be good enough? That only once you buy this face cream, hand sanitizer, shoe, whatever, you will be worth something? My bad -- I was under the impression that self-confidence, morality and courage comes from within, not from another accessory. I'm fairly certain that Beyonce is just as fierce barefoot.

So, really. It is just a shoe.

Not only am I angry that TSC chose to run this article because of the above reasons, but I am also incredibly disappointed. I am disappointed because of this: not everyone in the world even gets the luxury of choosing between two pairs of shoes. 40% of the world right now is living their lives without even a single pair of shoes. Across campus, we are even having a drive called Soles for Souls to assist survivors of the Haiti earthquake -- who, by the way, are dodging infectious diseases and sores on their feet, not "puddles or dirty sidewalks", which seemed to be Chow's major concern for her well-being. Instead of writing about trying to choose a "cool outfit", Chow could have discussed the merits of supporting companies such as TOMS shoes, who donate one pair of shoes to a child in need with every purchase or researched sweatshop-free shoes that are stylish and still supporting human rights.

I'm disappointed in you, TSC. As a university centered on personal growth, enlightenment and social awareness, I expect better from you, who is the public representation of what our university is about. There's nothing wrong with a little bit of fun every so often, but when I feel like I'm reading Cosmo instead of The New York Times, there's a problem.

And Chow, I encourage you to take part in the 2010 Day Without Shoes on April 8 and write about your experience for a future editorial. This day of awareness is sponsored by TOMS, and challenges each person to spend a day barefoot to understand the challenges of going barefoot that millions of children live every day.

Perhaps then you might be able to let go of this superficiality and understand that your power and inner strength comes from within....and gain a little perspective while you're at it.