BlondeBimbo

You are taking it very well! I would have thought you would have been bouncing of the wall after reading that! BB

For me it's worse when you see the shoes - fall in love with them, but when you try them on, either the size isn't avalable - as you said - or the size is OK, but they are not comfortable! Nothing worse than a pair of great shoes you can't buy because a strap rubs your little toe, or the shoe is too narrow, or..... too many other reasons! Arhhhh! BB

Hammer. BB

I am still a bimbo though. BB

Offer to buy her shoes as well! No girl can refuse an offer of shoes or chocolate BB

I just thought I would provide some feedback, having seen the film. Overall the review by from thezreview.co.uk was quite accurate, there are some funny bits – if you have seen the adverts – you have pretty much seen them. The acting is generally good - Chiwetel Ejiofor is very good, but the plot is a bit obvious, and to be honest rather boring. (I went to check my email & what was new on this site at one point during the film!) I too saw the original documentary – following the events at the time, this story has a very tentative link to that true® report. For anyone grasping at seeing “Drag-queens” on TV (no pun intended!) it has it moments, but really that is mainly during the musical numbers. So far as high heel stuff goes, again it is just there if you are grasping to see it. Had I paid to see it at the cinema I would have been really disappointed! – As it was it was worth the download and writing to DVD time, “Eye Candy” at most. I think they could have improved it soooo.. much if they would have kept the “Kinky” side – there is nothing kinky about the boots in the film – a better title would be “Boots for Drag-Queens”. Perhaps I had hoped for too much, but they played it a bit too safe and “traditional - view”, all the way through the film is the premise that in London one may find TVs etc. – but in Northampton – it’s cloth caps, ferrets, and they have never heard of transvestites! – Pity because Northampton has quite vibrant TV/BDSM/Swinging scenes. If they would have taken the title of the film to heart and included a bit of “Kink” it could have opened out the story-line and provided much more humour, and shock whilst remaining PG rated – after all even films like Mr & Mrs Smith had more kink! I think the rating of 2/5 is a fair reflection, that’s about my rating (although my partner rated it at 2 ½ - 3 out of 5 – there again he has no taste – after all he goes out with me …oops! ). BB

(Cat's) Mother (Do you use that saying in the US - "Who do you think you are - The cat's mother?")? Jim - Who do you think you are - The cat's Father? BB Oh - give my regards to Johnny

..... some people are even drawn to flip flops .....

Nooooo

Get thee behind me Satan - that's just too perverse!!!!!

BB

polkadot

You raised the proposal of definition of shoes, and then opened it out for a consensus; most of the people have indicated a practical measure based upon heel height.

In reading your posts it appears far from accepting the opinions of the many people who have indicated the preference for heel height vs shoe size, the opinions will be accepted only if they agree with your desire to use the front angle measurement.

.........Once we agree that the steepness/shoe angle is the figure of merit, ..............

I described in brief the key method used for medical analysis – which you indicated wouldn’t work – which is a pity since that is what’s used! - For medical/anatomical studies, the measurement is the muscle extension – any shortening of the Achilles tendon is of course irrelevant as in the high heel this, like the Plantar ligaments & fascia are all in a shortened state, it is the upper foot which is extended. Of course simple studies will use the angle of the sagittal plane to the ankle point and the ankle flexion but this ignores the motion in the metatarsals, which is significant in the case of high heel shoes. – Most football players and runners don’t run in high heel shoes so the analysis here uses the simpler case. (At least not on the field or open track!) (Note before anyone corrects me – I know the simple method is borderline for sprinters )

The two problems with using the front angle of the foot are firstly it’s not a simple measurement, and secondly it is not fixed for a given shoe, feet vary in all dimensions, not just length and width, but also in height, so I may wear a pair of heels, and with my low midfoot – the front face may be vertical, someone else of identical size, but with a higher midfoot wearing the same shoes could have a front face a few degrees beyond the vertical.

Others have also indicated this in many of the prior posts.

In practical terms none of the above are useful, measuring the line from the calcaneus to the head of the first metatarsal can only really be done by x-ray or similar, so how else would you determine the sagittal plane? Also I have never seen shoes sold – “this shoe will give a front face of 12 deg, for a 20% midfoot, 10 deg for a 25% midfoot…”

Of course one can go into the nth degree in determining angles taking into account sole thickness, shank thickness, shank curve, point of inflexion, but the major factor has to be the heel height vs shoe size, and for all practical purposes that’s all you need.

Exactly as Dr Shoe suggests!

.. In saying that hhberlin has raised another possibility - which is even simplier!

Take a standard size, say size 39 (size 6 UK, is that 8 ½ US?) – and assume the transitions are as Dr shoe proposed:

<1.5 Low. 1.5-3 Med, 3-4.5 High, >4.5 Ultra high

Then for each size up or down you add or subtract 1/8” - thus for size 41 (UK 7, US 9?) that’s two sizes up so add ¼” and the transition to ultra high becomes 4.75”

For UK and US that’s just the same as an adjustment of 1/8” for each ½ size. – so size UK 5 is two half sizes down, so subtract ¼” and the transition to ultra high becomes 4.25”

So the only info needed is

Size 39/UK6/US8.5 - <1.5 Low. 1.5-3 Med, 3-4.5 High, >4.5 Ultra high

For each size up/down, or each ½ size UK/US – add/subtract 1/8”.

That does KISS!

I know the shank angle changes in extreme cases, however – when does that occur?

The answer is in the ultra-high range anyhow!

Of course, if you wish, use the front angle, call it whatever you like, never the less I will still buy a pair of shoes based on the comfort, heel height, style etc.

I know a pair of 5” shoes will be fine for me all day at work, that they look good (most people consider I wear very high heels), what anyone’s classification is, is fine by me.

The definition depends upon the purpose, if the purpose is to ensure a favourite definition is “official” – it’s as good as any other.

BB

of faith.

I think the real problem with a definition of high/low.. etc. is that it all depends upon the purpose or use of the definition.

as I said before - why the definition?

If it is to measure the effects on the foot - it will be a measurement probably only possible via x-ray or similar.

Of course this is of no use on a practical level.

If it is to measure how "steep" it looks, either the front angle of the foot to the vertical /horizontal, or the general shape of the foot will work.

Of course this is of no use on a practical level.

If it is as a guide to the purchase of shoes then the heel height in relationship to foot length is a simple guide, which will work.

This is a practical measure useable by anyone once a simple table is made.

(This could be extended to two tables – one for predominantly straight shanks, and one for curved shanks – although measuring two shoes of identical height one having a straight and one a curved shank I find little difference in actual strain in my foot, or on the front angle – though the general shape is improved!)

However one may define anything in any way - but it’s only the practical usable measures that remain in use.

We all know Celsius - but how many of us use Rankine?

So for a consensus I would vote for Dr. Shoe's definition (perhaps tidied up a little and based on Euro measures).

BB

Then someone else would correct it! :drinking:

But what if that was wrong?

(Is there a pattern here?) :rofl:

I have to agree with pussyinboots pu equals Problems for U Basically they are plastic, which for me is a problem, as my feet need to breathe. I haven’t tried Italianheels, but the problem with all mail order is that you cannot check the size, the length and width changes between manufacturers so one cannot rely on the size alone. Since each mail order supplier themselves source shoes from different suppliers/ manufacturers even trying to gauge the correct size from previously bought shoes may not help. I would try to find out the manufacturer of the shoes you are looking at, perhaps a local shop may stock the same type (but at a greater cost!) so you may get a better guide to size. In Scotland in Edinburgh there is a shop called Jenners, they stock the same shoes as I buy, but via a friend in Manchester I can get the same shoes custom made by the same manufacturer (like you my right foot is larger, so they use their standard-lasts but for different sizes!) - and cheaper! BB

There are only two fashion features that influence comfort and safety: ankle straps and very thick soles. Ankle straps improve comfort and safety.

Can't see the point here - ankle straps on court shoes are extremely uncomfortable for me, and why safer? - A correctly fitting shoe does not slip off - but if the heel gets caught (in a paving gap for example) it does allow the foot to slip out a bit, with a strap I have seen one girl nearly cripple herself as she was wrenched back by the foot when the heel got caught - are these the only two fashion features affecting safety/comfort - I doubt it - surely a broad heel is safer and more comfortable than a stiletto (although I prefer the stiletto)!

Women like pointed shoes. Men hate them no matter who wears them.

None of my friends like the pointed shoe, they are awful to wear, yet on here a number of men have commented the pointed shoe is sexy.

Women who buy high heel shoes do not care how the shoes are made or what materials they are made of.

I don't agree with this, most of my friends either buy expensive leather well made shoes (although I think I am the only one who buys custom made), or limit their choice to the better designed end, the problem is that a pair of shoes cost £10 or less, but a pair of well made costs over £100, and true custom is in the £200 mark - that's over a weeks pay for someone working in a shop like McDonalds etc. so for most people it's not a matter of not caring, more a matter of no being able to afford them.

And of course if you are limited to the budget end of the market - it's difficult to understand what the quality end really means.

Cobblers can stretch the toeboxes and the straps for a small fee.

Not always the case - most cobblers will not touch the C**P shoes from the cheaper end of the market as they know any attempt at stretching will tear the pu material, or the stitching apart! In addition, for me no amount of strap stretching will cure a badly positioned strap.

I agree that one may buy very good quality shoes that are comfortable and will last for years – for a price, and of course one may buy true custom made which are the best and are of course the most expensive.

I tend to buy reasonable quality for shoes I will wear infrequently, expensive ones for general wear, and custom made (standard-last) for the ones I wear all day every day.

I have yet to buy custom-lasts, for me with my choice of style (standard court) the standard-last made shoes are fine.

BB

I agree. I must say I mistrust most things on the Internet, the problem being anyone just writes it - no checking at all! When one buys a book, the publisher has to ensure it's at least a bit accurate, that's not the case on the web. - as an example - I dive, yet I see so many references to us using Oxygen cylinders on the web - Oxygen is a toxin at depth (actually Wikipedia has it correct). The problem with this subject though is that it is not fact - but opinion! So no-one is really correct or wrong either Take "Surprisingly enough, however, most men who wear masculine-styled heels in public not only encounter very little resistance, but are met with a surprising amount of appreciation and encouragement for their choice of fashion. " That may be the case in hip areas of modern cosmopolitan cities, and fetish or other bars, but I guess that’s not the reaction you would get down some bible bashing areas, or other places where anything other than work boots for men would be acceptable! Perhaps people here see it as a good article because it supports the general view on this site? From our point of view it is a good entry. BB

I think the real problem with a definition of high/low.. etc. is that it all depends upon the purpose or use of the definition. For example, if the definition is to measure the physical effects, I suppose the definition would have to be measured in the degree of extension etc. exhibited by the muscles rather than any measure of angle etc. – although of course the angle of the shoe, and the shape caused to the foot would have effects on this. (i.e. a muscle 2" long extended to 3" is a 50% extension etc. - and is independant on any training - 50% may be a streach for some but not for others) Thus for a true measurement, it would not be a practical measure, but instead one only suitable for a research environment. At the other extreme one would just look at heel height, as is the case for most people, who just look at the rear of the heel and declare it high – in which case it’s purely subjective based on the viewer’s own experience. – My neighbour for example almost never wears high heels – for special parties she has been known to get some high (about 2 ½”) heels – in which she is clearly uncomfortable – her reaction to my (about 5”) heels is that they are ultra-high! A simple heel height scale would probably be suitable here. In the mid-range between these two examples would be the people on this site, our view on heel height tends to be based upon the angle the foot makes with the ankle – visual of course. We may then either decide on an angular measurement – taking into account the actual shape of the shoe as well as the simple angle based on heel height vs size or a simpler view based on heel height vs size alone. In either of the above cases, I think we need to define an angle that declares the transition between classifications, and then work out an appropriate height based upon shoe size So as an example, a size 39 ½ is 255 millimetres long (about 10”) and given the fact that only about 80% forms the slope portion (Ballet shoes excepting of course) then a 5” heel would form a 38.7 deg angle - this is under 40 deg – we may call this high - but the same 5” on a size 37 ½ (243 millimetres long) gives 40.8 deg – this is over 40 deg – so shall we call this fetish/ultra high? I think we should use European sizes – since they cannot be confused between UK and US so only one table is required. (Note I have gone for the simple approach on angles here !) BTW – the definition of < is ”less than” and > is “greater than” in mathematical terms. Therefore >2” is low heel - actually means “greater than 2” is low heel”! It does not mean up to - that only comes in a statement like <1” is flat heel> 2” is low heel> - where it’s an abbreviation of <1” is flat heel> <2” is low heel> Just something my maths professor had a big thing about!!!!! :sleeping: BB

Getting back to the original question.. I think there are a number of reasons Firstly, the style is driven by fashion – which is not a choice for the majority of us, after all if I go down any high street and look in the shoe shops, every shop is selling identical items, and even within each shop, the choice is limited, sure there are 100’s of shoe “styles” – but in reality there is not a wide actual choice, for example at the moment they are ALL pointy toe, they ALL have a choice of 2-3 buckle types… The shoes are “designed” as fashion items not items to actually wear! – A few years back, I remember a “Watchdog” report (TV) where a number of girls had bought stiletto shoes, and in each case the heel had broke off, challenging the shop the reporter was told – these shoes are designed as fashion styles, not designed for continual wear! - QED! The second point is that there is a large variance in feet, yet we purchase based only on one dimension – the length, as a child every time I was taken for shoes, the assistant measured length, and width and provided shoes to suit, by the time I was a teenager “that was only for kids”. I think a lot of issues come from a poor choice of shoe by the wearer – for example I have a low ankle, and as a child every pair of shoes had to have the side cut down & re-stitched so it would not rub the skin, - court shoes with heels don’t cause this because the slope of the foot provides clearance! (See I am even anatomically designed for high heels! ) – To this day, if I wear “flats” such as my safety shoes, I have this problem. Court shoes are extremely comfortable for me, but if I choose “strappy” shoes I have to be really careful as the straps can hurt after time – yet another pair – seemingly identical are fine, - just small differences cause such a change – yet I have friends who find the opposite courts are a torture for them. The third point is in the way shoes are purchased – we look at the style and then try the fit for 10 seconds! - Hardly an exhaustive test for suitability. In addition many shoes are bought mail order – given the wide variety of feet the chances of a good fit are small here! Another point – more for the men here, is that female shoe styles are designed with the smaller fit in mind, designed for say a size 4-5, so as shoe sizes spread away from this the design becomes somewhat inappropriate – for example some of my “larger” friends both in terms of shoe size and figure steer away from high heels, due to the extra weight which is concentrated in local areas of the foot, due to the combination of shoe slope, and their larger size – so I think for a larger male with larger feet it is less comfortable from a smaller female with smaller feet. I think the final point is that many of the shoes on sale today are just plain C**P! - Cheep and badly designed! – I have had some, generally bought mail order which are unusable! In each case the heel does not form a right angle with the floor – instead it slopes inward – so feels really bad, and of course breaks easily. High heels can be well made, but only if you are prepared to buy expensive well designed shoes, unfortunatly one may never realise this, if the only options are the C**P in the shops. As a point, I think badly made shoes are just for cheapness, for example, above I mentioned the heel forming an inward angle rather than a right angle and providing support, I think this is caused because they stock say a 4” heel with the top slope suitable for a size 5 shoe, in which case the angle is correct and the shoe supports the foot well, however for say size 6 shoe, they will not stock the correct heel instead they will use the smaller size, hence it slopes inward, in well made shoes they would either stock a wider range of heels, or use the larger size (say from a size 7) and cut the leather differently, and provide additional curve to the shoe such that it supports the foot correctly. Sorry for the long post, but in summary I think the problems are caused by a combination of: Style driven by fashion almost eliminating function. Limited choices of fit available – Adult shoes are a compromise (unlike kid’s shoes) Poor choice of purchasing – we do not really check the suitability. Unsuitable design – a one design fits all sizes is not correct. Poor quality – economies in design and manufacture result in unsuitable shoes. All of these can be cured of course the problem is the cost! – I tend to find a shoe design, which suits, in quality, style and fit; then stock-up! BB

theory

Sorry avatar removed by request. BB

Avatar & clips removed by request. BB

Hello, my name is BlondeBimbo. I am a masochist…. Weeeeeeeeeee!!!

wahay - worked out how to upload greater than 7kb! BB

Thanks, I was hoping to use it as my Avatar, but that's limited to 7kb and myarse is 91kb! As an Avatar I could have updated it frequently, but the signiture is tied in to each message. BB

Hi A3. Getting higher! BB

nah! I havn't got a video to create the image! BB