Let me tell you, hats are making a comeback. The number of trilbies and fedoras I’m seeing now (not worn by tossers trying to look ‘trendy’ but by upstanding gents) are encouraging. Hats haven’t been an accepted part of gentlemen’s dress since the 70s/80s.

But they’ll be back.

I myself am making a contribution to the correct way to dress by having a pocket handkerchief protruding from my suit pocket. Nice dark overcoat, gent’s umbrella swung in the correct manner, dapper cufflinks.

Actually when I wear my suit I look very Remington Steele-esque.

Like a very little Remington Steele?

aw, is Renquist on the wee side?

Last check 5’11”.

And I resent the use of ‘wee’. Makes it sound like I’m ‘wee’ in the underkilt department.

And I’m not.

Your objection is noted. We shall use the more politically correct term ‘of diminuative stature’..

*snerk*

Renquist - 20 February 2008 03:05 PM

hulitoons - 20 February 2008 01:52 PM

I don’t know, but this sounds to me like a ‘message’ being sent, or a warning to specific people.  I almost think the owners are still alive but their feet with shoes attached would be identifiable to a very specific group.

I think it’s far more likely they’re dead. As the guy says, limbs and feet do not usually float so it’s an anomalous occurrence that it shouldn’t be expected. Unless the perpetrator knew for sure that these feet would float it would be useless to throw them into the sea to send a message as it is far more likely they’d never turn up.

I’m not sure what you mean by their feet belonging to a specific ‘group’. You mean ethnicity? Because besides skin colour (which degrades after death) it’s hard to identify ethnicity from a bit of a corpse (though possible) and damn near everyone wears trainers.

No, not by color, like the mafia or a gang group.  All the feet were from the right side and all had shoes still attached that sort of lends to someone being ‘deliberate’.  I do understand that the message, in that case, would seem to be one that would be carried in a box or mailed etc., but perhaps not if the sender had a vague idea where the feet would wash up.

Renquist - 20 February 2008 04:47 PM

I mean for males aged under 40, trainers are a large part of casual wear.

I am significantly under the age of 40 and never wear trainers, which I assume is the equivalent of tennis shoes.  I wear these…

Neo - 21 February 2008 08:15 AM

Renquist - 20 February 2008 04:47 PM

I mean for males aged under 40, trainers are a large part of casual wear.

I am significantly under the age of 40 and never wear trainers, which I assume is the equivalent of tennis shoes.  I wear these…

I´m over 40 and I wear that kinda shoes too.

Eriks over 40 and likes these shoes as well….so do I.

Same here, I just don’t like trainers or sneakers.

Perhaps the sharks didn’t either.

Jason wears steel toe boots for work, he has 2 pairs of sneakers for non-work stuff.  He made a comment once that he had $200 dress shoes when he was a teenager.  I made the comment that every pair of shoes I have ever owned would not total to $200.