Crocs Mammoth: now in leopard print

Crocs_mammoth_leopard

We’d like to propose an ammendement to our own "animal print is acceptable on shoes" rule, if no one has any objections. The ammendments simply says, "except Crocs". In fact, we reckon we could probably add the phrase "except Crocs" to almost any fashion "rule" out there, such is the continuing horror caused by the platic shoes.

We’re not quite sure whether these animal print Mammoths are better or worse than the regular Crocs Mammoths, but we DO know we don’t like them, and would file them very firmly under "crimes of fashion". If you disagree, of course, you can find them at Macy’s, where they’re $45.

5 Comments

  • December 30, 2008

    Rock Hyrax

    I think these animal print ones are “better” than the standard because it takes longer to spot the holes and at least they’re not in a garish colour. Still hideous though…

    View Comment
  • December 30, 2008

    SJ

    I will never, for the life of me, understand how these shoes became acceptable to wear in public.
    I’d rather have a cute pair of wellies for out on a rainy day or in the garden. And you can get some really fun ones. So why the ugly Crocs? Their shape is ugly, they come in ugly colours, and what, pray tell, is the purpose behind lining them with fur?
    I’d wear my slippers in public before I wore Crocs.

    View Comment
  • December 30, 2008

    Anna, aka "ShoeSmitten"

    NO! Crocs are never okay in my book, especially in this ghastly style!

    View Comment
  • December 30, 2008

    Anna

    Just… no.

    View Comment
  • January 3, 2009

    lorrwill

    Ah-ha! Crocs have been sleeping with UGGs. I knew it!
    please.make.it.go.away.

    View Comment