Guy N. Heels

I tried again to view that pdf file. Now I'm being told that there is no such site. let alone file!...

So sorry, DandyDude, now I'm getting the same bit-bucket run-around. Either the file has been deleted, or else all links to it have been severed. Tain't me; tain't you; it must be them!

I can't stand much of his music (he very under-rated as a guitar player), but Prince truely is one of the coolest guys on the planet..

I remember years ago reading an article in one of the tabloids about his wardrobe and more specifically his heels, and thought "damn, thats cool as it gets"....

I saw his SuperBowl performance and was not particularly impressed. The question that kept going through my mind was:"How did this pot-washer ever make it in music?" But I've got to admit that what he lacks in talent, he more than makes up for with style. That guy could draw a crowd if Paris Hilton was doing a strip-tease 2 blocks away! I don't know exactly what cool is, but I'd have to say that Prince comes pretty close.

Mornington Crescent!!!! I win!!!!

What's he on about?

Elegant has a very good point and no psychologist is going to help. A friend of mine (male), found the link, pssionforfootwear.com for me and it changed my whole life along with comming here to hhplace. I found out that there is nothing wrong with me and it's OK to be your self. There are worse things and believe me, I have been them.

Hi there, Daisuki, and welcome back.

I must ask the question: Cured of what? The word cured implies that something's wrong - like you're suffering from some kind of disease. For example, I've got inoperable bone cancer and, unless they find something we don't presently know about, I will never be cured. So what's yer problem: dandruff, athlete's foot, halitosis? Those things can be cured.

On the other hand, I very firmly believe that: "If it isn't broken, don't fix it!" In your case, unless yer talking something that I just ain't picking up on, I don't see anything broken and I sure don't see anything that needs to be "cured". You happen to have an eye for a particular fashion. Is that causing you or anyone you know any specific problems: bad breath; being picked-up by the cops; starting fights with yer family/neighbors; missing work; etc? If not, there's no problem to fix and nothing to cure. So why don't you just relax, get plugged-in here at the forum again, and take a stroll in yer heels from time to time? Believe me, life is so much better when you can enjoy yourself for who you are.

My lecturer at college, Elaine Loft was 6'2" tall in stockinged feet- she had size 4 feet too! Bearing in mind her surname, see if you can guess what I called her?

Is there a prize for the correct guess?

I'd say that about 3 inches would be it (@ least to my knowlege) it all depends on what a person feels what makes a "high heel"

You know, my mother was 5'2" (exactly the same height as Elizabeth Taylor) and the vast majority of her shoes were about 3" at the heel. She did have some higher ones and I have worn some of her 5" plats (in my pre-teen years). So to my notion, a 3" heel is every bit a high heel.

Now I've never disputed the fact that higher heels exist. Right here on this forum, we have pics of people wearing much higher heels. But whenever some tries to claim that a shoe must have a 5" heel to be considered a high heel - well that rather begs the question of that individual's grip on reality. There are any number of experienced high heel wearers who simply couldn't manage a 5" heel.

So when I started this poll, I expected a short but firm survey that would pretty much establish 2.5" to 3" as the minimum height for a high heel. What happened was anything but what I expected. Of a sudden, we had all manner of people claiming heels of such preposterous heights that no manufacturer would dare make shoes in that range and expect to stay in business. For a while it began to look like a "can you top this?" contest - which was not what the poll is about.

But perhaps equally bewildering, was the notion that the minimum height is some subjective value - ergo, what's high for me ain't high for you; or what I wear in the daytime is different from the minimum I wear in the evening. Again, that's not what the poll was intended to establish. All I wanted to find out was what size heel would be the minimun you'd expect to find in the high heels section of your shoe store. Again, I expected a number somewhere around 3". What I got was a roller-coaster ride with more twists and turns than a barrel of fishhooks.

Does the size of a high heel shoe change its shape. So if i had a pair of size 6 and size 11 next to eachother with the same heel height will they have a different shape? obviously one will be bigger than the other.

I'm asking because ive recently got some high heels but they dont look as high as they are in the picture, the angle of the shoe is different.

thanks in advance adam

Well, it depends... As you may have deduced from some of the discussions on this board, the size of the shoe vs heel height does make a difference. In general, the smaller the shoe size - the lower the heel height required to make a truly pronounced arch in the foot/ankle. However, no small part of the size to height ratio is dependent upon the mfgr. Some mfgrs. do indeed take into account the size to height ratio, and therefore, as the shoe size goes down, so does the heel height. Or, to put it another way, as the shoe size increases, the heel height will also increase somewhat. Therefore a 4" heel on, say, a size 5 shoe might actually measure slightly less than 4" while the same shoe in a size 11 might actually measure more than 4".

On the other hand, there are mfgrs. who very strictly hold to the heel height, and if you are wanting a 4" heel - that's what you get, regardless of the size involved. Thus you might find a size 5 shoe looking like a very high heel, but the same style shoe in, say, a size 11 might look like a ridiculously low heel.

The bottom line here, is that there seems to be no hard and firm rule that everyone adheres to.

I just figured-out that I've got to take over my daughter's 386 and mount a 5.25 floppy drive in it, or else I'll never be able to retrieve the stuff I've still got on floppies! I hope she didn't have any plans for her computer.

I think those styles are WAY fun - especially the first ones with the huge bows on them. You would think that with fashion designers putting guys in heels, people would catch on - but nooooooooooooo.....people are stuck in that tunnel-vision mode that THESE are only for WOMEN and the MEN can ONLY wear what we don't. I am steadily hating more and more this view that women can do whatever they want, yet we are limited more and more because women take a fashion that men are wearing, start wearing it themselves, and all of a sudden - BANG! It's taboo to the men!

Pretty soon, all we'll have left are brown slacks, black wing-tip ugly boats, and business shirts. OH wait.....they're wearing those TOO.......aren't they?

Loincloth anyone? GAH, it drives me nuts.

You said it, S.Q! About the only area of male clothing that the gals haven't intruded upon are the jockstraps. Nowadays they're wearing everything from bib overalls and work boots, to business suits and neckties. From a practical point of view, there is nothing in clothing that is still distinctively male anymore. So what's the big deal if guys decide to wear skirts & heels? I'm even going to make myself a nice leather purse.

What a story! But the tall gals are out there. I recall when I was working in the Peachtree Tower in downtown Atlanta, many moons ago, that there was a classy restaurant called the Top O Peachtree up on the top floor. Well, they hired a really tall gal as a greeter down in the main lobby. Now let me tell you, in high heels and a tophat & tails, this gal looked to be about 7' tall. So one evening while I was waiting for someone, I struck up a conversation with her. She admitted that she stood about 6'2" in stockings, and with 4" heels and the tophat, she guessed that she really was more than 7' tall.

Anyone from Australia in this forum? Looking for advice on where to go to obtain a pair of high boots with a nice high heel? Thanks.

Hi there, Jumpsuit.

Welcome to the forum, mate. Yup, we've got some Aussies here. I don't know where they've gotten to lately, but they're around somewhere. Just keep reading the posts and checking the profiles here. You'll find 'em.

its the very same with me GUY N HEELS! I take a womens 9 medium, so I know it will fit. only difference is my work shoes which are womens black REEBOK "princess" style I wear for work, I find that my feet feel better if I get them in 9 WIDE (my feet tend to swell up in the afternoon sometimes)

Well, it sounds to me like you need to go that extra mile and try to find Wide width shoes. Personally, I wear a US women's size 10 and pretty much what comes off the shelf fits fine. But if you're experiencing problems, I would definitely suggest looking for the wider shoes and even insisting upon them at the shoe store. If they don't have them, there's usually another store just down the street.

A long time a go I had a pair of knee high boots that had a zipper up the back and I really thought the style was great. I am giving serious thought to converting a pair of pull on thigh boots to having a back fill length zipper. (Any advice would be appreciated.)...

The concept of a full length zipper in the back has appeal, especially if you plan to wear jeans over them.

I loved the Stylebytes commentaries.

Usual "heels belong to women alone" sort of crap, along with a few obvious heel partisans most likely from these very boards!

I tried to view the pdf, but my Adobe Reader said that the file was damaged beyond repair and could not be opened. Any alternatives?

The file wasn't damaged. I'm using Adobe7.0; if you aren't you'd better get it.

Yup. These days they're typically shot because they look Middle Eastern rather than because they look Irish, but it's still happening :-(.

We don't get much of that kind of news over here, but I'll bet yer suntan salons are taking a financial nosedive. After all, moral relativism clearly calls for killing-off yer enemies before they kill you, right? So rather than the absolute rule of law, we can have "death squads" to gun you down in the streets just because you look like...(you fill-in the blank). Then they can get around to an official inquiry later (after they've all got through cleaning their guns), just to be sure that it was all proper and in order; and if it turns out that they made a mistake I'm sure they'll be kind enough to send a note of condolence to yer family. Ain't moral relativism in a totalitarian police state great?

I'll take the rule of law and absolutes like: "...shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law...", any day! And anyone who doesn't want that is welcome to what you have.

I am borderline diabetic. Sometimes, i notice my feet do start to swell when wearing pumps for about 2 hours or more. My feet start hurting badly! My toes feel like they're in a vice! Then when i take the pumps off, my feet feel like they've had cold water poured on them after being on fire. I am trying to wear pumps a lot more, because the pairs i have are a bit tight, and i figure wearing them in will do good. I wish i was more daring, and could walk down the street with them on.

If you are pre-diabetic the absolute best thing you can do for yourself is to go on a wholistic sugar-free diet. Quit eating prepared foods and sugarfied junk and start eating whole grains, non-sugared vegetables, and use honey or natural sweeteners in your food. And of course, all soda pop and other junkie drinks have got to go. Believe it or not, you're actually better-off drinking plain water. Also, if you smoke - that's got to go! Believe it or not, some tobbaccos are sugar-cured and will trigger your craving for sugar.

You need to start treating sugar like the poison that it is! Refined white sugar is about as naturally occuring as gasoline! If your car won't run on it, what makes you think your god-given body will? Also, there is a book written by William Dufty called Sugar Blues. Get a copy and read it, pronto! Start taking all natural vitamins - particularly the vitamin B complex in large doses. Don't fall for the hogwash about specific B vitamins being good for you. Nowhere in nature do we find a single B vitamin, but rather, always the entire B complex. Brewer's Yeast is a good source of the B complex.

Forget about the heels until you first get your health straightened out. That'll take somewhere between 6 weeks and six months if you're diligent about it.

Well, it seems to me that you first need to determine if your feet have grown or swelled. The big difference is that, with proper care, the swelling will eventually go away but genuine growth will not. However, yer never going to find out while wearing heels. The only real answer is to set the heels aside and stay off your feet as much as possible for a week or two. If the swelling starts to go away you'll know that yer feet were protesting too much abuse and you'll simply have to restrict your heel wearing to perhaps an hour or two at a time. If your feet have actually grown, then you'll have to make the appropriate adjustment when you buy shoes.

Flurries on and off all day Fri

1" this morning - day before Ishtar.

Nope. Been on Prozac a couple of times for depression, but my family doctor says I'm one of the sanest and most self-aware people he's met and my local consultant psychiatrist appears to be a long, long way from committing me. I call this a good thing, as I'm not a great fan of staying anywhere that the locks are on the outside of the rooms....

Fortunately, political and religious beliefs are not currently grounds for being sectioned in the UK - even if they are obviously delusional, as you seem to think mine are - unless I am a danger to myself or those around me. I'm glad of this; a representational democracy needs a good cross-section of beliefs to stay healthy. I happen to represent one extreme of a number of those beliefs :-).

I'd much rather be here, in a (relatively) healthy democracy, than in a totalitarian regime where my freedom to express my beliefs was more limited - say Nazi Germany, current North Korea, Iraq under Saddam Hussein (and, in fact, now) or 16th century England. What about you?

- Peter

AHHhh- Prozac, I knew we'd eventually uncover the difficulty.

As for totalitarian regimes, yer absolutely right! It's been no joy living in one for the last 6 years. Of course, the biggest difference between the American version and those others that you mention is that here we "outsource" our human torture interrogations, but other than that it's pretty much the same.

So how's your regime doing? Are they still shooting suspected terrorists dead in the streets and holding inquirys later?

Well, your report seems to confirm the old saying that old age ain't for sissies....

Yer right, I keep finding myself referring to my army training - keep going and ignore the pain (although it's gettin a lot harder to ignore) and hope that it's downhill after I make the crest of that next ridge. (Actually, it's all been pretty much down hill for the last 5 or 6 years, now that I think about it.)

I have never had any problems with width as I wear a women's B or Medium width. Maybe the fact that I have worn women's heels for decades has helped my feet to be accustomed to the width of the women's Medium width shoes. I am blessed to have always been able to buy right off of the shelves or through the catalogs.

Cheers---

Dawn HH

My story is very much like Dawn's, but finding properly fitting shoes can be a hassel for some people.

The trick is to understand how the shoes are manufactured so that you can work within the parameters of what the factory is doing. Generally, the lenght is the dimension of primary importance and so you absolutely must first fit that dimension. Width is the secondary consideration and understanding that most shoe mfgrs. build women's shoes to a medium or B width helps. So if you need something wider than that, you will have to ask for either a Wide width or an Extra Wide width. If that fails, then your choices are becoming rather narrow, indeed. 1] You can try buying leather shoes in the closest possible width and try streaching them to fit (the streachers alone will cost you close to $50) or 2] you can get your shoes custom built. (These days a custom shoe maker will probably charge between $100 to $200 dollars just for starters.) Good luck to you!

So God is telling us to execute adulterous women? Of course the man gets away scot free. Are those God's rules or the rules drawn up by the blokes to make life sweet for themselves?

And therein lies the problem. I'm assuming Guy you're putting yourself in the 1% who are sane. Nobody would say 1% of people are sane - but I'm in the 99% who aren't sane. I'm not sure whether it's worth having a discussion with someone who truly believes that whenever anyone says anything that they disagree with it's because they're insane.

Hi there, Fog. Long time, no hear from.

So let's take yer questions in reverse order, shall we? Nope, I'm a guy with bone cancer and a broken back who is still wearing skirts and high heels. Worse yet, I'm finding myself having an argument with another high-heel wearing male who considers himself a moral relativist. After I struted into a courtroom wearing earrings, heels and a skirt, I seriously doubt that I would stand a very good chance in a competency hearing - unless the jury was willing to commit the judge first. As for the male high-heeled moral relativist - he's certifiable!

Now, about stoning those wretched adulters - just what makes you so sure the man was supposed to get off the hook? It is true that the scriptures don't specify the manner of punishment for the man, but most conservative circles held to the notion: "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander". However, there are some biblical scholars who have now uncovered evidence that the male adulterer was to either be: hanged, garroted, or torn apart by horses:furious: . So adultery in one community would merely get you stoned:text_help:, whereas in some other community you might literally be torn limb from limb.

Does that help you feel a little better now, Fog? Good to hear from you again.

...Here's a challenge for you: State any one belief that a) you believe to be absolutely Right, is internally consistent (so you cannot for example cite "Thou shalt not kill" unless you also cite "the death penalty is Absolutely Wrong) and c) you believe fewer than one person in a hundred, worldwide, would disagree with you, including the internal-consistency corollories. We'll leave 1% room for lunatics to have their lunatic views here. The key point is *worldwide* - your sample cannot be constrained by country, political system, race, relative wealth, religious belief or similar.

I can't find any belief that satisfies these criteria; nor can I find any way of moving the world to a state where these criteria could be satisfied. Therefore I am a relativist, not an absolutist.

The first and foremost problem that I find with your challenge, is the notion that the lunatic and mentally & emotionally defectives represent 1% of the population of this world. It is my personal belief that the truly sane people represent less than 1% of the population. Consequently, I am finding far less "middle ground" between us.

...Other than some wording you've carefully chosen to be asymmetric, yes, I think you have the idea.

...I have had an affair in the past. I have also watched a partner have an affair. (In each case we're now living with the person with whom we had the affair, but that's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.) Again, I don't think there's anything absolute that would have allowed us to get together and decide who was morally Right - not least because it's difficult to evaluate the short-term and long-term effects of the action on the people concerned.

I *do* think that attempts to form absolute sets of morals based on any premise other than "might is right" are doomed to failure due to internal inconsistency, however. As a (fictional?) example, consider a majority-Christian country where the death penalty is used sufficiently widely to cause concern among human rights groups monitoring the situation, where intimidation and electoral fraud have been used to change electoral outcomes to the point that the UN has been asked to send in monitoring teams, and where the nominally Christian leaders are willing to go to war, condemning tens or hundreds of thousands on both sides to death in exchange for possibly preventing a few hundred to a few thousand deaths. One can construct an absolute moral code based on "might is right" where that is Right; otherwise, we're down to moral relativism - it's Right for the leaders (and perhaps some/most of the inabitants of) that country.

Returning to the question of moral relativism. The first and foremost problem that I see with your construct is: Who is to determine what is "right" and what sort of standards are to be employed? As I understand your construct, what is "right" is what is determined by whoever is in power. Therefore, I see no difference between your construct and the more pragmatic: Power flows from the barrel of a gun." Therefore, whoever happens to be in power at the moment (ergo, whoever has the gun) gets to determine what what is "right" and what is "wrong". So in the absence of any absolute standards, if the color of your hair, or the color of your skin happens to be "wrong" or offensive to the one in power, then according to your assessment, the one with the gun has the "right" to wipe you out and remove your offensive presence from the face of the earth.

It sounds much to whimsical or capricious to me. I would much rather have some absolute values and the rule of law rather than the whim or caprice of some "moral relativist" who happens to have superior firepower in his hands at the moment.

i prefer full length zips myself,a lot easier to get on and off. and it doesnt really detract from the look,at least for me

I quite agree. All last winter I was looking for some mid-calf boots but was unable to find any at a price I was able to pay. Well just last week-end I found these on sale.

At the checkout counter the lady noticed that one was marked a size smaller than the other, so she insisted that I try them on right then & there. Altogether, not bad for $15, right?