Puffer

Pick-ups are not at all common in the UK as 'family' vehicles, rather than for trade use, although my wife's (female) cousin does have one. I have a VW Passat diesel estate and can get a lot inside (such as a tall freezer) or on the roof rack. Only yesterday I collected a full 8 x 4 sheet of 25mm plywood (very heavy) from the timber merchant and took it on the roof rack to my stepson's house for some work there (window cills, suitably edged with a moulding). Well roped-down, transporting such an item presents few difficulties; I have safely carried even 4.8m timber - a little longer than the car - in that way. What is NOT fun is trying to load e.g. plasterboard single-handed, especially if there is a wind.

The position in much of the rural UK is very similar, albeit on a smaller scale. The big difference is the fuel price, although lower here now than recently. You are paying about 46p per litre; we currently pay (for unleaded petrol) around £1.30/litre - or almost three times as much. (Diesel is typically about 9-10p/litre dearer in UK.)

Yes, understood. A standardisation that helps comparison - provided we all understand and adopt the same standard, which mlroseplant takes as being the actual height of a Eu38 shoe heel. As good as anything. I expect the shoes I pictured above were sold as being 5", which they probably were in size 38.

This was all getting rather confusing! I hadn't realised that you were describing heel heights by their 'standard' equivalent, and that the true measured height of yours is 14.7mm, which explains a lot as regards wearability. But it makes the pic look even odder - I would have guessed those heels as shown to be no more than 4.25" high in your size. I know what it is like to wear heels (probably same foot size as yours: UK 11/12) that are a truly measured 5" or 5.25" high - not easy; you have my further respect for 'managing' when practising in a true 5.75" heel! It would help mutual understanding if true heel heights were always quoted, with the 'standard equivalent' too if helpful when shoe size is not only marginally larger or smaller. These Office shoes (UK8) belonging to a friend have a true height of 131mm = 5.16". They look noticeably higher (and certainly steeper) than your boots.

Yes, very nice wearable boots. I have a similar pair from ASOS (slightly shorter shaft and no platform) which are ideal; for discreet outings. And my duplicate pair (unworn) are still available for purchase:

In the UK and most other European countries, the majority of the population live within a mile or two of most of the 'basic' facilities (shops, post office, public transport etc) that they need to access frequently. And some workers live similarly close to their workplace too. Walking to and from them is usually easy and safe, economical, and desirable from an exercise viewpoint. My impression is that the US is typically very different in that these 'local' trips often involve significantly longer distances and may be difficult or unsafe for walking - so the automobile reigns supreme. That said, the typical American shopping mall or complex seems to require a lot of legwork if to be explored fully - or does every shopper tend to move their car around the estate? (It is some years since I was last in the US (Florida) and I remember the distances needed to reach other places in the same neighbourhood, but not what the drill was when visiting several stores in one complex.)

I know that, like me, you have large feet, but those heels look lower than 12cm. I'm not doubting the measurement, nor the challenge of mastering them, but you could perhaps set 13cm as your next goal! I do hope you can get a satisfactory remedy for the wonky heel, and without it costing too much. Let us know what the cobbler's reaction is on seeing them.

Some of my lists and schedules are written in Latin on vellum with a quill pen. (Wax tablets have proved increasingly hard to source.)

Without a clearer (side) view of the sandals - which I assume to have fully open sides - it is difficult to suggest a true remedy, but if the shank is twisted, it should be possible to bend it back without stressing the heel (if that is still correctly attached to the shank). Place a piece of 2" x 1" timber about 12-15" long across the sole (probably at mid-shank) and another below, and then clamp both pieces at their ends, to make a tight 'wood/sandal sandwich'. Then apply force to one end of the sandwich whilst holding the front part of the sandal. That should allow the shank to be twisted without stressing the heel or upper. If that doesn't work, it might be possible to create a 'double sandwich' at opposite ends of the shank and twist the two pairs of timber in opposition to bend the shank back. (You might be able to get away with one timber at each end, held to the sole by a single clamp and with a little resilient packing on the other side to avoid damage.)

Is it not possible to twist the heel/shank back into the correct alignment? You have little or nothing to lose.

... but can (and should) be over-ridden, especially if not set to the desired (local) language. It is the servant, not the master.

Indeed, and as you have 'practised' your current heel-wearing in England, you ought to spell it that way! 🤯

I don't have a view either but I have some circulation issues that encourage me to keep my feet and hands warm in winter - bedsocks are a must and these slipper-socks (found in Lidl as a Christmas item) have proved very snug, and a bit of fun too. I can see that tights could be an alternative, with added leg warmth too, but I can't imagine my wife approving. It did seem to me that the Youtube video was encouraging men to wear both tights and footwear of a distinctly feminine style, as both were featured throughout in what was ostensibly a message aimed at men. Nothing wrong with that; maybe wearing tights is a straightforward first step towards unisex/feminine dressing?

Reminds me of the note on the music teacher's door: 'Gone Chopin; Bach in a minuet. Offenbach in half a minuet.' (I hope he remembered his Chopin Liszt.)