Do you have examples of things that look good but are totally impractical?
Asked by
LuckyGuy (
43880
)
March 26th, 2012
High heels come to mind first. They look sexy but they’re not good for feet. You can’t run in them. They don’t offer healthy support. But they sure look good.
A Ferrari is another example. It has 2 inches of ground clearance, no storage space, uncomfortable ride. But, damn, it looks good.
Can you think of other examples?
Is there a term for this characteristic? What would you call it?
This is in Social so humor is welcome.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
24 Answers
90% of women’s fashion unfortunately.
Most teapots. When you tip them over, they leak all over the table. (Is this a prostate problem?)
Great question. But first, high heels do not look good. It’s painful and sad to see a woman stumbling around in these “shoes”. It’s surprising that they’re considered “sexy” by some large part of the population. Odd.
I think there are so many items that fall into this category. I don’t personally find these things attractive or nice to look at, but many do. And it’s a complete mystery to me why this is.
Two big pet peeves of mine are:
– lawns
– rugs
Most people spend so much time on making their lawn look good, that it’s entirely impractical. They don’t even want their kids playing in the yard because it will ruin it (plus, the chemicals they use give extra incentive to keep kids off).
I know a few people who have purchased very expensive rugs, only to keep people out of that room because they are afraid the rug may be ruined.
The Mclaren MP4–12C. 592 horsepower in a car weighing 2880 pounds.0 to 60mph in 3 seconds. 60mph to 0 in 100 feet. But oh that would be so fun to drive.
A lot of the things that immediately come to mind are actually quite practical in the sense that they are tools for enhancing one’s image. If you consider that the ultimate “goal” of any creature is the propagation of their genes, then status-enhancing stuff can be seen as very practical. It’s contextual: a pencil skirt could be very practical at enhancing your breeding chances, but very impractical if a predator were after you.
@Blackberry They’re useful if you have – err, stomach problems.
These are some great examples! Got any more?
I’d say “big boobs” but that would be rude.
@LuckyGuy Again though, I guess for the purposes of procreation and attracting potential mates, big boobs serve an evolutionary purpose.
long fingernails (they also look nasty to me, but many people find them attractive)
Tattoos, it seems, if one is looking for a more professional career.
Oh yeah, expensive glassware. I’ve literally had a champagne glass crack in hot water. We cannot have nice things in our house ever.
@tom_g Rugs are great! Aesthetics aside, they can warm up hardwood, laminate, tile or concrete floors.
They also do double duty when you have kids. Buffers the inevitable falls and bumps. And minimizes the damage to your floors (more expensive than a rug in the long run).
I have to agree with your other one though. Unused lawns are pretty stupid.
I think pockets on infant clothing are pretty useless.
An infant running shoes. I know they’ve morphed into more fashion than function. But the image of babies doing laps around the track crack me up.
Flip-flops, for running in.
Light textiles on couches, etc., for spilling dark food on.
@thorninmud: Beat me to it. Last time I wore heels, I got laid. Seems pretty practical to me. ;)
In all honesty, I think testicles are incredibly impractical. They are finicky, temperature wise, and so easy to damage. It would be much more practical if humans had evolved so that testicles were inside the body.
@KatawaGrey I you ever had an idea of how bad a groin shot hurts you’d say that in caps.
@KatawaGrey I have a set and I don’t think they look sporty at all. (Testicles! Not high heels! Sheesh!)
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
