OLC Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 One funny thing I noticed as I compulsively read all the posts (which I also did catching up on cakewrecks !), I noticed that this picture : http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b183/susie_bubble/Style%20Bubble/vogboys10.jpg is actually of a woman. It can be pretty hard to tell with some of the models these days. I'm not sure if that's a step forward or just fashion's latest stick-insect female models. But on a more cheerful note, it was interesting to see all the different ways men wore high-heels. I've never seen a guy in heels in real life in an "everyday" setting - maybe I should pay more attention next time I'm in Boston.
Mickey S. Posted March 28, 2009 Author Posted March 28, 2009 I noticed that this picture : ... is actually of a woman. Yeah, I guess if she would be around like this for an everyday setting, looking a little 'androgyne' like this, and if 'they' knew she was a girl noone would actually complain. But if a guy just wore heels or had his nails done... OMG! ... you know. ;o) CU! -Mike
Histiletto Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 I can't say that this bit of information is surprizing, but it is good to see that others are actively heeling whether they know of this forum or not. The public attitude is accepting male heelers in certain areas. Perhaps, this attitude is ready to spread as more people realize men everywhere want to share in this choice. This article is showing some of the more flamboyant pictures which mostly features stilettos of which I personally want to promote, but this will also open the way for all to wear the heels they like with out having to nitpick about what gender the heels portray.
Kittyinboots Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 One funny thing I noticed as I compulsively read all the posts (which I also did catching up on cakewrecks !), I noticed that this picture : http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b183/susie_bubble/Style%20Bubble/vogboys10.jpg is actually of a woman. It can be pretty hard to tell with some of the models these days. I'm not sure if that's a step forward or just fashion's latest stick-insect female models. But on a more cheerful note, it was interesting to see all the different ways men wore high-heels. I've never seen a guy in heels in real life in an "everyday" setting - maybe I should pay more attention next time I'm in Boston. Wow, that could have fooled me! Looks like a man in heels to me.
shrimper Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 One funny thing I noticed as I compulsively read all the posts (which I also did catching up on cakewrecks !), I noticed that this picture : http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b183/susie_bubble/Style%20Bubble/vogboys10.jpg is actually of a woman. It can be pretty hard to tell with some of the models these days. I'm not sure if that's a step forward or just fashion's latest stick-insect female models. But on a more cheerful note, it was interesting to see all the different ways men wore high-heels. I've never seen a guy in heels in real life in an "everyday" setting - maybe I should pay more attention next time I'm in Boston. I don't agree with you that the subject is a woman. It is an androgynous image (could be either).
Elegant Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 Biologically, it's a woman. Culturally / socially, it's an androgyne. What is good for a goose, can be good for any gender!
Histiletto Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 Does it really matter? Many women have had masculine dominant features, just as many men have had feminine dominant features. We are both human and should be given the respect and equality that is our right to expect.
OLC Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 I don't know, I think that raises an interesting question of what being a "woman" is. Although, it's just a fashion photo shoot where the model was hired and probably didn't really care about what she looked like. As a fashion image, I agree that it's androgynous - but I suppose that I read enough fashion magazines that I'm used to flat-chested women being pictured not always in poofy party dresses that scream "I have a girlybits". Perhaps some photographers are using it seriously to comment about sex and gender, though I often feel that it's just a shock tactic just like many other common trends in fashion photography (including "dead/stoned/abused women" and such). I'm all for breaking down gender boundaries, but perhaps it's me being cynical of the fashion world that makes it come off as false to me. Not meant to be offensive. I'm just interested in how people decide if something is "male" or "female". I admit, I'm don't always dress like a girl or act like one or look like one, and from the time I've spent talking to cross-dressers and transgender/transsexual people, I gather it's usually more than just what a person looks like. Obviously not all *that* relevant to a fashion shoot where everything is usually just about topical image.
shrimper Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 How does anyone KNOW this is a woman? Do you have the model's name? I need some convincing on this one.
Olounda Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 My vote is with shrimper... i need convincing evidence that this is a female. Looking at the cheek bone structure, and the thickness/size of the hands, it appears as though it is a male...
benno Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 The posted photo is a woman. I remember seeing the photo in Vogue or something similar when it was 1st printed. It was meant to confuse. Still a great look... I'd wear it... I have worn similar outfits in public quite a few times. Cheers, Ben
OLC Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 It's Natasha Vojnovic (I dunno if she has a twin). I remember her from a "Joan of Arc" style photo-shoot in "W" Magazine - they did her up all manly that time too, and I thought it was a man until an opportune breast-shot. http://images.fashionmodeldirectory.com/model/000000110263-natasha_vojnovic-fullsize.jpg http://www.bwgreyscale.com/adimg07/adv_3119.JPG A little risqué (nothing actually showing, though) : http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_sKP94Mmu28s/SU57ajYM8uI/AAAAAAAAGtY/ZcNLi1SNF5o/s400/17_natasha.jpg veerrry thin and not very curvy. :c And something completely different from her : http://www.bwgreyscale.com/adimg14/adv_7653.JPG
mtnsofheels Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Wow that can certainly play with the mind, as well as show that both men and women can sway the looks to the point of confusion. Good pics and thanks for setting that up OLC. Pictures like that let one think about more outfits and put togethers which we could do. Awesome, thanks, Mtnsofheels
Pam Posted April 3, 2009 Posted April 3, 2009 I think he name is Katie Sketch a female model from Canada. P
Danielinheels Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 How does anyone KNOW this is a woman? Do you have the model's name? I need some convincing on this one. I don't, but I do have those same shoes as you in your avatar -- of course, I doctored away the bows Be yourself; everyone else is already taken. - Oscar Wilde
dww Posted April 9, 2009 Posted April 9, 2009 I would say this is a women, good picture though. life is not a rehearsal
Dawn HH Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 It appears to be a woman to me. Cheers--- Dawn HH High Heeled Boots Forever!
shrimper Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Here is a picture of Natasha. There is not a match on facial features to the androgyne.
jo Posted April 23, 2009 Posted April 23, 2009 Fendi started a small line of wedge heels for men a year or two back. Missed that being mentioned previously: http://www.fashion-stylist.net/blog/tag/_king-louis-xiv_/
Recommended Posts