I have often heard people say: 'To judge a man look at his feet'. I wasn't told what judgment to make based on the many types of feet I have come across in my life--the perfectly manicured, the never-washed, the soft & blushing pink, long (at times painted) toe nails that run over a layer of dirt, sand and anything they fancy, the wrinkled worn-out feet, the hairy, dark, rough look, and then feet which have a differently shaped nails on each toe (thanks to the 'peel off' routine practised).
How does the feet maketh a person theory work?
- Clean feet means a man with a clean-heart or clean habits.
- Long & dirty toe nails means he's too much of a workaholic to bother about his dirty toes.
- Perfectly manicured means he's the metro or whatever-sexual man who loves to pamper himself at parlours, stock up on cosmetics and who loves to put his best "foot" forward.
- Soft & blushing means he barely exerts his feet. He dresses them in Nike or Puma shoes, sits back and orders things/people around than actually get up, walk and do it.
- Wrinkled & Worn-out means he believes in 'barefoot' tradition. No fancy footwear for him please.
- The hairy, rough look is meant to scream Macho.
- The zig-zag designer toe-nails scream Stay Away From This Man. Peeling off (or in very bizarre cases biting off) toe-nails is a time-pass that soon turns addictive. Imagine picking on the dirty nails and then dipping those fingers into your snack bowl!
Is this what we are supposed to infer? Or is there a more logical reasoning to it? Feel free to enlighten me please.
There have been feet I've found attractive but it definitely hasn't been the reason I chose the men I have (had) in my life. Didn't know feet mattered so much. Do I have to get fussy about my son's feet to ensure he makes a good impression!
PS: While in school we were given this great piece of gyan that the size of a boy's/man's palm or feet is an indication of how big/small his proud possession is!