TOUGH GUYS DON’T WEAR INVISIBLE SOCKS,BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHY YOU SHOULD
It’s astonishing that something could be so divisive. You might think in the age of Kardashians, Southern Rail and Martin Shkreli that we would talk about something else, but the Esquire offices recently played host to a heated debate on the use of invisible socks, the little cotton booties you wear when you want to go bareankled without nuding-up your full foot. One camp, let’s call them the “macho traditionalists”, argued that these socks are an abomination, taking the position that if Hemingway and his ilk would have balked at the idea, then so should we. The other side of the argument, the side with which you, dear reader, should be aligned, is that they make sense. Logical, sensible sense.
If you want to wear your loafers, tennis shoes, or even your derbies with a bare ankle then surely you should do it in the way that guarantees maximum comfort and minimum foot-sweat and blisters? It’s like if you prefer to wear women’s underwear. You feel good, as does the contents of said underwear, and no one knows a thing. But if your thong rides up and someone cottons on, then you might have a few tricky questions to answer, and sadly, the same goes for invisible socks.
The moles of the menswear milieu, they are bloody good at what they do, but should remain in the shadows, because damn, are they ugly. No man looks good in a pair of un-shoed invisible socks. Partly because of the weird, pointy, balletpump shape they give your foot, but mainly because they expose the lie. Everyone will know how logical and sensible you are, and there’s nothing sexy about logic and good sense. In fact, it might be worth wearing a thong, just in case you need to distract everyone at short notice.