Ghillie brogues - why the dislike and resentment..?

[Troglodyte]

It seems that whenever ghillie-brogues become the object of focus, the response they produce is often dislike or dispise.

Why is this?

What is the reason for railing against them?

I can see that to some eyes they are so unlike 'normal' shoes that they could be seen as too much a form of costume, or even theatrical.

But they are not a new invention, and are far older in their style and tradition than the Oxford or Derby (two English county towns) styles that frequently get suggested for kilt-wear, and descriptions of a form of ghillies can be found in accounts from the 1500s onwards. I cannot think of any other current shoe style that the same can be said of.

I have seen that some think Ghillies are too dressy for anything but the most formal occasions, but the MacLeay and MacIan portraits of the 1870s and 1840s show them to be quite 'every day' as the written accounts tell us.

The one thing about ghillies is that they are totally and uniquely 'Highland', and primarily intended for kilt-wear - which other styles would struggle to answer. Even 'closed' full-brogues are more frequently seen with trousers than the kilt.

So what have I missed?

Is it that they have become associated with kilt-hire, and so not-quite-right? Are ghillie-brogue wearers seen as not knowing the 'rules' of correct Highland dress form?

When there are various versions available, in both black and brown, soft and flexible or stiff and thick soled, there are surely enough styles to suit most tastes and occasions. Some of the early how-to Highland dress guides suggest that the long laces are prefectly correctly tied around the instep, rather than around the ankle, or can be substituted with more normal short laces.

So, other than personal taste or preference, why the dislike.

Is there anyone out there who has the definitive answer..?