ShoeDre

Hey there Melbhhboy.  I can tell you for a fact that we live in a great city.  I've been many places in heels and potentially more and have had fun times without harassment.  Quite a few people have said lovely things along the way too.  I hope that one day you can experience the freedom of living in public as you wish.

Having bought some shoes from this company, I can tell you all that they make a quality product.  The sizing is small as people here have suggested.  I think in the case of the shoes I purchased, the width is rather narrow.  I'd vouch for the company's customer service too.  They were very helpful and I'd recommend them to everyone here.

12 hours ago, meganiwish said:

Fair play.  You know yourself well and chose your music with care, which I appreciate.  Please accept my apology for doubting you.  It's a lot for an audience to take in, though, so you might need to make a slow entrance.

Fair comment.  Personally, I sometimes think I need a slow entrance for myself.  Having read many of your posts, I get the idea, that you know what that may be like.

Now for today's theme...

There are many reasons as to why the first option seemed great as a theme tune.  Depending on how you wish to use the music, a number of interesting possibilities arise.  As entrance music, it starts with, "Don't fret precious I'm here."  That amuses me.  Seeing the music as a descriptor that reflects my core beliefs, it sarcastically points to the necessity of questioning the world around us, never taking anything for granted.  Thirdly, the music itself reflects my normal calm, but volatile disposition.

The manic phase of the second piece reflects two different aspects of my nature.  I'm wildly unpredictable, edging on chaotic.  My philosophical outlook is ultra-postmodern, believing that the truth, just like God, is dead.  Following set patterns of behaviour without reason, is no different to acting random by reason.  The other aspect also speaks to trying to live by my philosophical views in a world that basically seems to be on auto-play.  At times, I am frightening to be around, because I don't follow the rules just because someone makes them.

I do think the way you referenced the term 'avatar' made me think of an audio descriptor, in the same way that in avatar is a pictorial descriptor.  Furthering that argument, the term 'theme tune', could sum-up the entity, in the same way that television shows introduce their content, or awaken the viewer, to a viable mood for enjoying the constituent substance.  It's easy to misunderstand a single paragraph, especially if you have an exceptional mind... Pun intended! LOL!

It would be hard to pick just one option, but I do like this.

Edit:  I just thought of another great option...

Freestyle75,

I normally don't comment much on stuff here, but I thought looks 2, 3, 4 and 5 were so good, something needed to be said.  My wife, sitting beside me, also kept commenting on how good those outfits looked, especially outfit 5.  Well done!

I'm not sure about the previous answers, but the hydrogen car is effectively a battery car.  Just like other battery systems, the pure hydrogen holds potential energy.  It uses oxygen from our atmosphere as the other potential energy source.  The hydrogen is combined with oxygen, which releases energy in an exothermic reaction.  The resultant output is H2O aka water.  The reaction energy is harnessed to create drive.

I remember seeing a working model of this in a report at least five years ago.  At the time the key issues were cost and how the hydrogen was made.  I think hydrogen was roughly double the price of regular fuels at the time I viewed the report.

Making hydrogen uses energy.  If you use coal or petroleum sources to create the energy, then the process is just as dirty as our current system.  Harnessing renewable clean energy needs to be part of the process involved in hydrogen vehicles.

I will admit that this is all from memory, so I might have missed something.  Also worth noting, I don't know much about the above mentioned safety issues, however the current petroleum products shouldn't be considered ultra safe either.

Hope that helped a little.

Nails don't breathe just the same way that your hair doesn't breathe.  I think what you are trying to say is that your nails are porous.  Having polish on your nails is good as it helps protect them from water being absorbed and degrading the nail integrity.  This is why cuticle oil is good, just as oil treatments are helpful at protecting your hair.

The chemicals used to remove polish can be harsh, which again can be absorbed by your nails.  I would say constantly removing and applying nail polish would stress your nails, but eating well, hand cream lotions and cuticle oils would do more good than any resting might help.

Blade Runner.  Vangelis did it justice.

That's very cool freestyle75!  You look like you ready to go about your day with style,

Here we go... Another thread asking about what women think of men in heels.  Honestly, who cares!

Thanks for the positive feedback.  It was a beautiful day, which helps with the quality of photos.

Hey there, ShoeDre! Nice outfit! Did you get any comments while out and about?

Hey JeffB, I did get a few comments, one from a girl saying how she loves the monsters inc. t-shirt.  My wife and I were shopping, and whist trying on a few skirts and tops, someone told me they loved my leather skirt.  At another point, I had to try and settle my one year old whilst my wife was in the changing rooms, so I was standing there bouncing my baby girl.  As I was doing that, one of the ladies that were trying on some heels turned to me and stated that I was better in heels than she was.

As usual, people always looks when I'm out freestyling.  It really doesn't bother me unless someone is rude or tries to give some sort of disapproving look.  If they try to be funny, I say something funny back at them.  If they look at me in disgust, I give them a big cheesy smile and laugh.  The way I see it, it's like being judge at a beauty contest by the ugliest person in the room.  It just doesn't matter what they think.

I love to see others expressing themselves visually.  Steampunk, gothic lolita, hardcore punk, or couture fashion, it's all good.  What I can't stand is generic, sheepish expression.  It represents either the lack of cognitive capability and/or effort, or a fearful and cowardly non existance.

I finally got out in the sun!  I'm sure it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I like it.

It's purely coincidental that it's the same skirt and shoes as last time.  I'm sure that I'll get something else on camera soonish.

I see you're about the same age as my boy, a couple of years younger, so here's my ha'porth.  He's a full grown man (as are you) and can do what he wants.  He can vote, stand for Parliament, father children, drive a thirty ton lorry if he gets the licence, fight for his country, refuse to fight...  The list goes on.  It all stopped being any of my business when he reached majority.  Would anything he did make me feel different?  Well, if he murdered his sister, maybe, but otherwise he's always my boy.

 

I don't know your circumstances, but maybe you just need to 'man up', as you say across the Atlantic.  if all else fails you can move out and wear what you will at home.  I suspect, pace Steve, that your mother would have little interest and no questions.  I really don't want to know what my boy gets up to. So keep it secret if you like, or be open, but the main thing to remember is, none of her business.  don't let your mother live your life.  Mothers have to let go.  Much as it hurts, it's part of the job.

Simply put, you rock!  Couldn't have said it better myself.

Never discount that some shoes are simply uncomfortable.  Some shoes may work for others, but may not work for you as your feet are unique.  I always try shoes on first.  It upsets me when shoes are shaped badly for my feet.  In the long run (pun intended ) getting quality footwear that fits comfortably is the best solution you can find.  It's amazing how much longer I can wear the right shoes within a couple of days.  Your feet will be with you a long time, it's worth trying to do the best you can to look after them.

Thanks Kneehighs for understanding and taking the time to make a meaningful response.  I feel better about the possibility of having some creative discussions on fashion freestyling in the future.  I was hoping to post some pictures today, but my wife and I forgot to take any photos yesterday until it got too dark.  They ended up so blurry that I couldn't recover them.

SleekHeels, I think you're getting what I'm trying to do.  Think of Avril Lavigne, cute, pretty, but a little punk and young.  I would be great if I could master the Gary Numan styled eyeliner.  Yesterday I was rocking my Spiderman t-shirt with a pretty skirt and heels.  Thanks for your comments.

It's interesting, somehow I'm sort of upset at the responses I've seen to my pictures.  I know many people usually have different views, which is good even when they disagree or conflict with the original ideas.  This leaves me wondering what it is that has irritated me.

It seems that the responses have been somewhat directed with the aim of helping me choose better options to co-ordinate my look.  I don't mind this.  Unfortunately, it seems that a sort of carbon-copy approach has been established, where somehow a certain look has prevailed here in the freestyle thread.  This is where some of the irritation is placed.

Suggestions about blouses, shirts, ties and collars sort of irk me.  Blouses are what my grandmother wore.  Shirts, collars and ties are part of the old system, which reminds me of modernist black and white thinking.  I can appreciate other people wanting to go down that path, but I clearly cannot.

There have been some good suggestions too.  Tucking in the shirt, or a leather jacket are great ideas.  They sort of lead more towards how I see my expression going.  I would happily wear a collar with 6 inch, sharp spikes sticking out of it, or a bracket with spikes, or have my hair in multicoloured, sharp spikes.  I only wear stilettos, which has a link to the spikes sticking out of me philosophy.  I'd never wear wedges or thick heels.

My wife has in the past had similar sorts of experiences.  She has always loved vintage clothing and jewellery.  When she was in school, many or her peers didn't understand her preferences.  These days, vintage clothing is fashionable.  The idea of following others beliefs appeals to neither of us.  Currently, both of us love the crazy fashion ideas emanating from some of the youth in Japan.

I do appreciate the intent behind the comments is positive, which is why I don't want people to get the idea that I'm angry because people disagree.  I just feel frustrated that the comments seem so one-dimensional creativity wise.  I posted my pictures with the idea of expanding the looks seen here.  It would love to see some others adding variance to this freestyle thread.

There will be more pictures at some point.  I go out dressed like this when I get the chance.  It's hard to get time with a young, busy family.

The A-line skirt gives it a girly look to be sure.  In line with what other people have said, a button down blouse made from a soft feminine fabric and in a light feminine color might tone down the outfit a bit.   Maybe tucking in the top would help make the entire outfit into a more age appropriate cohesive whole. 

Interesting you should say tuck the shirt in...  The one thing I didn't like was how the top was kind of removing the A-line the skirt was giving.  I've worn the skirt out again, but the next time I semi-tucked a similar shirt in so that is was not tightly tucked, but tucked in enough to raise the length of the top, so that the skirt could be better seen.  I was very happy with the results, which has lead me to think that I just need to be careful about the length of the tops I wear with certain high-waisted skirts.

As to the Idea of wearing a more feminine top, that would look good in one way, but would not be allowing for the masculine side of how I want to present myself.  I am trying to wear some feminine clothing without simply just crossdressing.  I don't mind crossdressing, but I don't really do it all that often.  The idea behind this look is to be obviously a man, wearing a selection of clothes which happens to come from both sides of the store.  I would consider this a look comfortable enough to wear any non-rainy day.  I know others are doing this too, but I'm just choosing a few items that would be seen as more feminine.

Thanks for all the comments so far.  I didn't respond earlier, because I wanted to add something to the discussion.  I understand everyone has their preferences and didn't want to just agree or disagree about opinions.  Ironically, somehow that made me feel vain.  I'll see if I can get some better pictures up soon, but my phone camera and I are fighting over how much light is required for a good photo.

It's taken me quite a while to get something posted in this thread.  So here goes...

The skirt is amazing!  http://shop.alannahhill.com.au/clothing/skirts/ooops-oh-my-skirt.html

Sorry, can't help but laugh whilst thinking, "Don't call me stupid!"

I like the way you reference text that you don't understand, then make an argument which leaves no doubt in displaying your ignorance.  At the beginning of this exercise, I aimed to display an alternate view.  I hope others may have enjoyed the points I made, even if in no other way than aesthetically.

Alas I feel there is no point continuing this argument any further.  Unfortunately even the most basic attempt to understand, seems to be missing.  You kept trying to correct the term health care, yet you didn't even google it, or get a dictionary.  Pathetic!

From Dictionary.com

 

health·care [helth-kair] Show IPA

noun Also, health care.

1.

the field concerned with the maintenance or restoration of the health of the body or mind.

2.

any of the procedures or methods employed in this field.

adjective Also, health-care.

3.

of, pertaining to, or involved in healthcare: healthcare workers; a healthcare center.

Origin:
health + care

From Wikipedia

 

Health care (or healthcare) is the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease, illness, injury, and other physical and mental impairments in human beings. Health care is delivered by practitioners in allied health, dentistry, midwifery-obstetrics, medicine, nursing, optometry, pharmacy, psychology and other care providers. It refers to the work done in providing primary care, secondary care, and tertiary care, as well as in public health.

Wasn't that hard to do!

To me it seems that there are a number of logical disconnects occuring here.

- You're not paranoid, you just don't trust the government and believe that both the government and regulation should be decreased.  Instead of showing your trust to prove you're not paranoid, you rationalise your distrust in government regulation.  Even more ironicallly, you are trying to join the governmental ranks.

- You believe that the good of an individual is of upmost importance, using Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao as examples proving your point,  The problem here is that these people are great examples of dictatorships where the interaction of people working together in forming a social structure was actually denied.  Dictatorships are not socialist movements.  Democracy is a far better socialist structure in that the masses are involved in shaping the structures in their civilisation.

- You say that people should be responsible for their own health care.  As my wife told me, if you have no insurance and get sick, who pays?  Say you have a stroke and go into a coma for ten years, who pays then?  Want a guess?  Or what should you do about children, or those too mentally ill to choose? For those who don't know the US system, in some cases the taxpayer pays for critical types of care of others that are not insured.  Othertimes, the patient gets sued for the costs, which often leads to medical bankrupcy and increased insurance and healthcare costs.  Meanwhile non-medical types profit off the ill.

- All this talk about the evil Obamacare plan.  It's forcing people to have medical insurance, which would mean less responsibility for the government as there would be less uninsured people having the government pay for critical care.  It's making it illegal for insurance providers to reject high risk applicants.  To someone with government run healthcare, this system is about the smallest infringement possible on personal freedom.  It's just another tax really.

- You attempted to correct my references to government healthcare as medical insurance.  These two things are not the same.  As Dr. Shoe has previously stated, in places where governmant healthcare exists, you can choose to have extra medical insurance which you pay for individually.  Unfortunately the US system is not even close to having government healthcare, which is why you may have difficulty understanding this point.

- I'm not sure how you link the good of the community to higher suicide rates, but it seems like a bit of a stretch.  Studies have shown that the distribution of wealth plays a large part in the overall happiness of a society.  The greater the gap between the rich and the poor, the greater the social disruption and unhappiness.  What you see in the US is a perfect example of this fact.  The steady increase in disparity occuring in the US is mirrored by the increasing prison populations and the rise in violent behaviour.

- As mentioned by others, my reference to anarchy and liberty is relevant as one is an extension of the other.  It's probably hard to understand that US thinking is quite extreme to the right on the spectrum.  What you see as socialist is not accurate.  By saying that healthcare and education should be in the hands of the government is not even close to the ideas that someone like Mao believed.  A moderate view tries to blend liberty and social responsibility.

- In an attempt to say that you have life experience to forge your opinions from, you neglected to tell me of the many different cultures that you have experienced, or even truly understand.  For example, my wife has lived in four different continents.  I've experienced a number of cultures and have further researched others as part of my philosophical studies.  The social democracy reference I made earlier can be seen 2000 years ago in Greece.

It is challenging to discuss a topic such as this, when most people when asked, cannot tell the difference between capitalism and a free market.  When understanding capitalism, very few people agree with the ideology it promotes.  Liberty is much the same.  To it's extreme, there is no liberty in anarchy.  We have thousands of years to observe the feudal systems which prevailed prior to any socialist types of movements.  Since the introduction of nuclear weapons, we have been further pushed away from our primitive past.  We are now forced to negotiate.  Negotiation in itself is a way of moderating our desires with the desires of others.

Furthermore, it seems that when discussing topics such as these, we must avoid thinking in dicotemies.  I'm sure there is enough modern evidence to the errors of fundemental thinking.  If you want to follow a dionysian approach to liberty, be sure someone is being hurt.  Therein lies another failing in the as long as it hurts no one paradigm.  Within the infinite diversity of humanity, there is no state where everyone agrees.  Just look at the problems involved in attempting to create an international justice system.  The outlook of the Chinese in that humans have the right to exist in completely independent sovereign states, clearly twists the human rights issue on its head.

Another point of interest lies in education.  Can we truly experience liberty when we do not understand the implications and effects of our choices?  Have the issues of poverty restricting availability of education been factored in?  How about generational poverty, or long term social repression?  Advocating liberty would thus mean advocating education, unless you mean that we have the liberty to have no liberty.  The logos even associated to the principles begins to fall down.

It's important that we carefully examine the rhetoric spewed upon us by those professing a complete understand in how we should be building our social and governmental structures.  Anyone saying they know what needs to be done, immediately becomes dubious in my mind.  I normally try to avoid getting involved in these sorts of discussions, but seeing so many overly verbose posts adding little to the topic has sort of motivated me to respond in this way.

This is incredible.  ILK, you are advocating anarchy in the guise of liberty.  Your reasoning is paranoia.  How can a system where only the rich can have their hands out profiting from the sick needing medical care be good?  No level of competitive based price war will make the price of healthcare as cheap as a government run, non-profit system.

I'm sure you won't understand, but at times the good of the community much come first.  Vaccinations are a great example of how misinformed people continue to fight a good that fifty to one hundred years ago people would have killed to have.  You don't live in a country where government healthcare is provided.  If you did, you wouldn't be arguing the way you are.

Please understand, I'm making this statement blunt because the facts are out there.  One in two people will get cancer at some point in their lives.  There are many other health issues that arise when you get older.  If you're the lucky one who never needs healthcare later in life, then you should still see your gamble as an attempt to avoid working together with your fellow human beings in creating a better world for those that follow you.

I mean no disrespect in making this argument.  Veritas unum.

This topic would make me laugh if it wasn't so sad.  My wife lived most of her life in the states.  Since she moved to Australia, she has now been exposed to both sides of this debate.  Just like the British version, Australia has government managed healthcare, where we all have access to free medical care.  There is no doubt in her mind that the government managed version of healthcare is far superior to the privatised US version.

I'm sorry to say it so bluntly, but the US system is one of the worst systems in the first world.  Most of the people that go broke in the US do so because of healthcare costs.  It is hard to understand how the US system can be defended in any way.  All arguments against using government healthcare fall into two catagories, paranoid and ignorant.

The US has a number of aspects to it that are brilliant, such as the separation of chuch and state.  I don't want this to seem like an anti US post.  It's just that unfortunately this point can't be any easier to prove to anyone with both an open mind and the wisdom of understanding other systems.

Thanks for the feedback.  I'm not too worried about the high of the heels, although 6inch is about my max.  My biggest worry is that they have a thin toebox.