mlroseplant

Back in the mid 90s, there was a certain style of cowboy boot that had a pretty substantial heel on it, bordering on "not low," always in conjunction with a kiltie. You would see them around places where there was line dancing, mostly country bars, in other words. After a certain film released in 2005 decimated cowboy boot sales, that style of heel has not reappeared, even though the market has rebounded somewhat.

I believe we have also failed to explore the role that footwear plays in determining whether an outfit lies on the dressier side of the line, or whether it lies on the more casual side. I believe that at the extreme ends, that is, the most casual and the most dressy outfits, the types of footwear one must use is more rigid, without running the risk of looking ridiculous or at least odd.

Pictured below and juxtaposed are the same exact shoes with different types of outfits. One is a reproduction of the picture taken a week ago, which is evidently universally loved by all, and the other is a picture of the same shoes when I first got them, and was taken for the purpose of showing the shoes only. My point is that the shoes do not make the second outfit any more dressy or less casual. In fact, to my mind, it just looks odd, like I had put on my men's dress oxfords with shorts and a t-shirt. The other outfit, which is far more dressy, but not really all that dressy, could be affected drastically by changing the shoes.

At the other end of the spectrum, wearing sneakers with a tuxedo just looks dumb. Oddly enough, at the extreme dressy end of the (usually) female spectrum, you never see single sole pumps, do you?

Yes, the office worker was a woman. I'm still the only guy I've ever actually seen in high heels in real life, like not performing in some sort of show.

There's always one, isn't there? Pianist Yuja Wang continues to wear enormous platforms at her concerts/recitals, even as such shoes have gone out of style. One could argue about what constitutes a formal setting nowadays, but a classical music concert (as a performer) is the only time I ever have cause to wear a tuxedo, ever. I don't play in an orchestra anymore, but the last time I did, I'm pretty such I wore platforms with my tux. I think if I had to choose today, I would probably wear single sole.

12 hours ago, Puffer said:

I too find it hard to reconcile these concepts.   Yes, casual = non-formal, which surely implies some simplicity and utilitarianism in style and look, with minimal embellishment?   Since when has a shoe or boot with an intentionally built-up platform sole (as distinct from a cleated sole for grip) been other than embellished for effect rather than need?   (One might thus argue that any 'high heel' cannot be casual, but a modest cuban/block/wedge heel at least could be considered as an integral part of many otherwise plain/casual shoe styles.)   If I saw someone in high(ish) platform shoes - or indeed modest single-sole stilettos - out shopping for groceries, I would hesitate to call their dress 'casual', even if the activity is clearly both 'casual' and 'informal'.    That all said, I can accept that concepts have changed over the years.   In the early 1960s, a woman would be as likely to wear a pair of mid-heeled stilettos as she would a pair of slip-on flats for almost any informal activity, but nowadays the heels (with or without a platform) would (alas) be mostly kept for what little remains of formal/dressy activity.

I am evidently a curiosity among the employees at my usual supermarket, and they are becoming more vocal about it, as they slowly realize that I'm not going to become irritated with them. Last week I had my list ready, and I purchased my weekly comestibles directly after church, wearing the sort of pinkish outfit and the single sole stiletto pumps pictured several replies above. A couple of hours later, I realized that I had not read my recipe carefully enough, and had to return to the store, this time wearing jeans, t-shirt, and heeled wooden mules of the type that I usually wear for most of the warmer months in casual situations.

A female worker commented on my outfit change, which took me a little bit by surprise, as there must have been hundreds of other customers through that store between my visits. I explained that the first time I was wearing church clothes, and that now I was.  .  . obviously NOT. I wonder what kind of conversation/gossip THAT generated in the break room.

When I went to my employer's shop to do some paperwork, I saw a late 30s/early 40s office worker in actual high heels! I thought to myself "No way!" I have been with this employer for over 5 years, and in that time, I have never witnessed this sight. Not that I spend very much time at the shop, but still.

How about we let the girls have our neckties, and, in exchange, we will take their heels. I see a lot of girls wearing neckties these days.

11 hours ago, Puffer said:

I agree that a plain(ish) single-sole stiletto court/pump with a pointed toe is the classic 'dressy' shoe for most occasions - simple but effective.   But I find it hard to equate a platform shoe with a 'more casual' look; its intentionally heavier/chunkier appearance suggests the opposite, surely?   And even more so the increasingly common 'work boot' styles with thick cleated soles and bulbous toes - casual only in the sense of being the opposite of elegant.   It seems to me that truly casual footwear has to be something like a ballet flat, a canvas plimsoll (sneaker) or a rubber flip-flop.   

For once, you have me stumped. You must be using a different definition of "casual" from what I intended, and I can't figure out what definition that might be. What I meant by "casual" is that which is worn in non-formal situations in one's leisure time. To be sure, the popular definition of "formal" has shifted a lot during my lifetime, but I am talking about situations like grocery shopping or sightseeing, where one is highly unlikely to be wearing a jacket and a tie (or some floor length, flowing dress). The platforms go better with the casual look than with more formal, dressier looks.

13 hours ago, HappyinHeels said:

Mlroseplant, 

Agree with those who like your outfits. Those Bellafina pumps are just like my Bakers “Peyton” nude pumps with 6” heels. Never wore them with a hot pink jacket but have with dresses, some slacks like Mr Krenzer, and just recently with some bootcut jeans. Keep your part of Iowa stylish by doing your thing. Your townsfolk are counting on it! HinH

Haven't seen you in an age, HiH! Greetings from Iowa. I had ask Uncle Google about your Bakers shoes, but I can see the similarity. One has to conclude that it is a somewhat dated style these days, but still quite presentable under the right circumstances. There are several major designers who still offer the same basic style, so SOMEBODY is still buying it. I do have to agree with Krenzer, Puffer, Kneehighs, et al., though. For dressier occasions the single sole pump looks, well, just better somehow. The platform looks more casual, which is fine, because I happen to wear heels in casual situations.

On 10/23/2023 at 8:46 PM, Bubba136 said:

What an elegant look.  As shown in some of your past photos, your taste for assembling outfits is beyond compliment.  I don’t doubt for an instant that each Sunday the curiosity of your fellow attendees is aroused as to what look you will be sharing at that day’s service.  Having followed you since your beginning here, and given the “larger than normal attendees role” you assume, I am seriously curious at the amount of attention and feedback you’ve gotten over the years regarding your wearing high heels.  

It may be that people privately look forward to seeing what I have thrown together on any given week, but it is rarely mentioned by anyone. In fact, if anyone says anything, it's usually my 82 year old mother, and she never has anything negative to say. She likes it when I wear red, for some reason.

If I compliment somebody else on their outfit, then maybe I might have a short conversation. A few months ago, I bought my first pair of Mary Janes, and when I walked into the sanctuary, I passed one of the members of the other band that plays at the so-called "contemporary" worship service right before me. I said, "Hey Marcia, check these out! I thought of you when I bought them. I believe they've got your name written all over them." And it's true--they do look exactly like something she would wear. Only hers would undoubtedly have a somewhat lower heel.

Again, believe it or don't, it just doesn't come up very often.

Thank you all for your compliments. I guess this must have been a pretty good outfit because my fashionista friend from college said it was probably her favorite outfit that I've ever worn. Not bad, considering I am terrible at planning these things. I'm usually ironing something 30 minutes before the service begins, if that gives you any indication about how I put an outfit together on Sunday mornings.

Standing still is an interesting subject to some. Even Jenny said way back when that it was to be avoided at all costs. As I remember, she even had specific techniques and exercises to deal with standing. For those who may not know, Jenny's High Stiletto Heels was the predecessor to this website, sometime late in the last century. For me, standing still is not an option. Those involved in live TV have known this for years, but those of us new to the whole livestream thing have never thought about it until recently--actions and mannerisms which you would never notice in real life show up bigger than big when the cameras are rolling. I am not sure if the camera really adds 10 pounds to your weight, but it sure does notice every funny face you make, every time you bend over to pick up something you've dropped on the floor, and certainly rocking back and forth on one's heels to the point of distraction. That doesn't even count musical mistakes. In addition to that, everything is recorded for all of history and you can't get rid of the videos, ever. They are out there, somewhere.

On 10/21/2023 at 3:24 PM, 5150PLB1 said:

I think the communion girl's shoes are more suitable for the beach, not at a church.

I don't know that I'd want to wear those on a beach, for several reasons, but I get it. And that's kind of what barely passes for dressy sandals these days. She could have gone up a step or down a step with it--either moved up to really cute non-platform sandals or gone with Birkenstocks. I've seen both done by people of that age group, and usually the latter. I don't think anybody cares. There are like half a dozen people who actually still dress up for church anyway.

There was a glorious time when we Americans actually made fun of Birkenstocks, and now 35 years later, they have come to be one of the less objectionable exponents out there.

Speaking of 5 inches, my Steve Madden Klory pumps, that which I have called my perfect pumps after a long search, approach 5 inches, but do not reach it. What I can't understand is why I think it is a great idea, given my duties, to wear such shoes to church. I can sort of walk in them, that's not the real problem. It's the standing for an hour, and THEN trying to walk in them while carrying instruments and equipment. Luckily, that stuff is never on camera. I have become rather proficient at standing still in heels, something I used to struggle with quite a bit. I have little idea how you manage to wear 5 inchers every day. Mad props to you!

I had fun dragging out some shoes that I haven't for a while. Sometimes I think I am getting better at this heel thing, and sometimes I don't. These Nine West Bellafina pumps are perhaps slightly dated, but I haven't worn them but a handful of times over the years. They are way more comfortable and walkable than I remembered. I should wear them more often. I did, in fact, go grocery shopping in them, and I got asked what my pronouns are by a young fellow who works at the establishment.  I shouldn't be surprised about that anymore, but I still am. I know it's rude of me to look over the tops of my glasses with that look that says, "Don't ask such silly questions, young man.  .  ." I explained to him that although I may be an honorary member of the LGBTQ community, I do not technically meet the requirements. I don't think a girl has ever asked me what my pronouns are. Maybe they are more intuitive than boys.

19 hours ago, Jkrenzer said:

@mlroseplantall that beautiful work on the altar platform and the socket cover is really crooked.

Yeah, I know! And I had to sit right in front of it for an hour.

21 hours ago, Bubba136 said:

 

 

 

Taking a second look at this picture, and thinking again about it’s purpose, it is difficult to tell the organist’s sex from the clothes she is wearing. I say “She” because the heels of her shoes look to be thicker than those on shoes that a boy would be wearing.  However, if I was playing the organ, and someone took a picture of me like that, the heels on my shoes would be much taller thus adding more “trash to the mash.”

The organist in question is a longtime friend of mine, and she is definitely a she, although from a distance she appears rather androgynous. Without getting into it too much, it is a style and lifestyle choice based on her deep Catholic faith. For example, I am quite sure I could fit the entire contents of her apartment in the back of my van. As for the shoes, organ shoes for both men and women have big heels on them to facilitate certain playing techniques.

My friend is quite fashion challenged, and most of the time she appears to have picked out random scraps of cloth to wear over her body, but we've all gotten used to that over the last 20 years. She does actually own a couple of cute pairs of sandals, and one of them has actual heels!

I have a couple pair that are getting toward your retired ones, I just have to be very careful not to absentmindedly wear them out to the grocery store or something.

There has been quite a bit of talk about feminine style becoming gradually less feminine. It has also been suggested that somehow this phenomenon is political. It might be easy for one to assume that under certain circumstances. I would suggest, however, that we've been here before. Remember the Grunge Era of the mid 1990s? High heels pretty much disappeared for several years, and if there were any, they were huge honking combat boot things. I can remember talking about this on Jenny's High Stiletto Heels site, the predecessor to this site.

I can remember, having been a sort of foster parent to a teenaged girl at the time, that it seemed the fashion object of the time was to look as dirt poor as possible. People went to a great deal of trouble to make it look like they rolled out of bed about 15 minutes before they showed up at school. The coolest kids always had 2 inches of raggedy string around their pant hems, as the style was to wear your jeans 2 inches long and walk on the hems all day. Belly buttons were definitely on parade, though maybe not as much as today. Sound a bit familiar? This stuff has happened before, and people will get tired of it after a few years.

This is not to say that kids never dress up at all anymore. I took this picture the other day, and the subject was accidental. I was actually trying to get a picture of the church organist, but this young lady was standing in my view, serving communion. After cropping and blurring faces, I feel I can post this good example of what young women consider dressing up a little bit, looking decent. No heels, of course, but hardly masculine. It would seem that announcing the death of femininity is perhaps premature.

@Jkrenzer, you are mostly right, these mules are 4 1/2", which is pretty typical for most of my single sole mules. However, most of my casual shoes have a bit of a platform, so appear higher than they actually are.

I did something that I haven't done in years on Sunday. I wore the same pair of shoes two weeks in a row. The horror! But I had a very good reason for doing so.

Every year about this time, our church has a joint service with the local college in their chapel. Normally, I throw on my choir robe in the background just before we have to sing, as I find it very difficult to play guitar in a choir robe (arms are too full and flowing). However, this Sunday I had no such instrumental duties, and would be wearing my robe for the entire service. I decided that my Caressa mary janes were a perfect match, color-wise, for the robe, and that I'd wear the matching pants too. It met with enthusiastic approval from those who notice or care about such things.

It also had the side effect of proving these shoes for walking. You see, the college chapel is less than half a mile away, and it doesn't make any sense to drive there unless one has something substantial to carry. One thing I can say is that on a college campus on a Sunday morning, a guy walking down the street wearing a choir robe and carrying a black folder does not draw the least bit of notice, heels or no heels.

I apparently am getting ready to celebrate 11 years next month, although I have been around much longer than that as a lurker. In the 11-15 years before I actually joined, I went from being an admirer to being a secret wearer to being a public wearer. I ventured out for the first time in heels sometime in May 2012, six months before I officially joined HHP. The world was less friendly to my fashion choices back then, and HHP was being run by some less than friendly people. So indeed some things have changed for the better, including the stability of my income.

I have run through my collection, and evidently I have very few pictures from those days, and in fact I can't find a single one from earlier than about 2015, by which time I had established myself as a regular high heel wearer. Here are some of my earliest what I would call actual high heels, i.e., 3 inches or more difference from toe to heel.

A long overdue trip to Costco in my Mia animal print mules. I believe they are my only closed toed mules that you wouldn't call a clog, and I believe they are also my only animal print shoes, period. I tell myself every so often that if I took the initiative and wore heels this high more regularly, I would eventually learn to walk in them. I think I did ok once my ankles got good and loose after a while.

Hi Cat, good to see you back. Is Lululemon really worth the extra $$$? That's probably a stupid question, but perhaps you could elaborate on the superior qualities.

I submit once again, this week's church outfit. It is very similar to an outfit I wore last spring, only without the jacket. That was kind of unwitting, because I'm still struggling to get my wardrobe back in order after having to move the whole thing hurriedly due to our plumbing problem of this past summer. I'm hoping to use this opportunity to get rid of a lot of things, but it hasn't worked so far!

I am wearing one of my favorite shirts in salmon (from some hole-in-the-wall shop in Vietnam), along with maroon pants from Costco. As I recall, these were sold as "ankle pants," so they fit me just fine as regular pants, no alteration necessary. I have found this is a decent strategy now that I no longer have a trusted tailor. The shoes are called Caressa, and according to the label, they are made in Spain. With a moderate 4 1/8" heel, they are easy to live with, and they didn't eat any holes in my feet, at least not in about three hours of church duty.

The answer to the question is that I'm not really sure. My record must have occurred either in 2017, when I attended the North Georgia chamber music retreat, or in 2018, when I took a trip to Chicago with three other families. Both days would have exceeded 12 hours by some margin, but it's not like I was on my feet all day in either case. I wore sandals in both cases, although they were not the same sandals in each case. I remember my feet being super tired at the music retreat, but that may have been due to the terrain (mountainous). It was a bit of a challenge walking on that college campus in heels, especially while carrying a cello.

As an interesting aside, both of these marathon heel trips were from my "lazy" time, when I wasn't doing much walking in heels for the purpose of training. It was basically all extracirricular and incidental at that time. Secondly, the shoes pictured here were common to both trips (they were my "dress" shoes), and they are the only pair that still survives today.

I haven't weighed in on this yet because the thread got a little too far off the track right from the beginning. I don't think heels are gone forever, in just the same way that the suit and tie is not gone forever. It's just that the application of such clothing is rather limited today, because the world is much more casual than it was 50 years ago. There are a few women that still wear heels because they want to, but there are fewer and fewer every year who wear them because they feel they have to.

One of my high school classmates (1986) got a job at Wells Fargo right out of college, and she's still there today, getting ready to retire soon. When she first started, it was expected that you show up to the office every day wearing a suit and tie, or a suit and hosiery and heels. That is just simply no longer the case. And honestly, how many people would choose to wear a tie every day if it weren't required? Very few, including among our bunch. There's your answer.

Having said that, I know very well that many women sort of aspire to heels, because I get enough regular feedback to know that the desire is kind of latently there. 90% of the time it's, "Oh I WISH I could.  .  . Oh, I could NEVER wear those!" Blah, blah, blah. There are about half a dozen girls in my son's high school class who always wear heels when the occasion is dressy. Problem is, the occasion is hardly ever dressy, so the shoes don't get much practice. As a result, I have yet to see any girl that age who actually looks comfortable and relaxed. Contrast that to my age group where there were several girls who had mastered the art of high heel walking by 7th or 8th grade.

No, I don't think they're going away, because almost everyone agrees they look cool. They will continue to be on the sidelines, however, because of the general state of fashion in the modern world.

11 hours ago, bambam said:

So, I wasn't sequestered, although sequester can still occur after selection. It can occur during the evidentiary process, to be sure nothing is improperly seen or heard from  media or other people. That way, only the lawyers decide what is seen. 

Nothing was said, strangely, although the model was more vocal ABOUT heels while we spoke. And the lawyers who wore them were very aware of the image they portrayed, as they wore flats at any moment they could. 

I could have guessed that. I obviously can't get inside of anybody's brain, but I would be willing to bet that like for most women, it's a love/hate thing. Obviously, some of those lawyers thought that the heels projected a certain look that they wanted, but unlike say, us, they're unwilling or unable to put in the work that would allow them to wear them for 8 hours without thinking about it too much. Or just simply go with a less-than-"huge" heels. Even Christian Louboutin does in fact make 85 and 100mm heels!