Nostalgia from 1960

[Cali]

I use Aldo gel pads. They put a gel padding at the ball of the foot, but they also help keep your foot from sliding down and crushing your toes.

I've had major toe surgery with bones/joints removed and I have a large toe box.  4th most painful thing I been through when they pulled the two 4 inch pins out of my foot; the only time I have screamed in a doctors office.

[Puffer]

7 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

... I still cannot understand how it is that some of my more "squidgy" shoes are not as comfortable as some other shoes which have absolutely no padding whatever. For example, these Miu Miu sandals I got recently have zero padding. Your foot rests directly on bare wood, except for the tag right underneath where your heel rests that says, "Miu Miu" on it. Same with my Miu Miu clogs. Nothing but bare wood in there. Either of those are good for all day or several miles of walking. On the other hand, I've got a number of other shoes that have significant padding, and are less comfortable. Absolute heel steepness, within reason, does not really seem to be the key to understanding total comfort either.

...

 

5 hours ago, RonC said:

...

I think there are a number of ways a shoe can cause discomfort.  However, the vast majority of the discussions of foot pain and high heels deals with pressure on the ball of the foot and toes being squeezed as they are pushed down into pointed shoes.  It can be scientifically shown that the greater the heel height, the grater the downforce on the forefoot.  That is pretty simple physics.  Design can alleviate some of that by attempting to shift weight back through higher arch support or altered slope to the heel section, but the laws of physics can only be overcome to a certain point.  What I personally have found is that the fit of the shoe in terms of where the bottom of the arch/start of the sole hit my foot makes the most difference.  If there is support just behind the ball of my foot and up through the arch, the shoe is more comfortable and I slide down less into the toe box.  If the ball of my foot extends out past the spot where the arch and sole meet, they will not be comfortable, regardless of overall size/width characteristics.  

I think you have both identified the principal mischief, albeit from different directions.   The main area of potential pressure and pain is likely to be at thebottom of the 'heel slope' and this is where padding is most beneficial.   (My practical experience is limited but I do know that my MJ boots with a 5" heel are immediately comfortable to stand in because I can feel the cushioning support of the fairly thick padding at this point.)   Padding under the back of the heel does not help here, although I would have thought that one's foot constantly hitting the hard wood of a mule heel could give rise to some other problems - but melrose has not reported this - or maybe is (literally) hardened to it.

Perhaps a high-heeled mule with a padded front insole and a very open front in soft, close-fitting leather is the ultimate in comfort with minimal risk of injury?   If so, melrose is going to fare better than many others here!

[RonC]

8 hours ago, Cali said:

4th most painful thing I been through when they pulled the two 4 inch pins out of my foot; the only time I have screamed in a doctors office.

My wife went through that as well.  I wish that on no one.

I was reading about the Brannock device (the device for measuring feet to use in shoe fitting) and learned something I didn't know.  I know it measures heel to end of toe length, but there is also an adjustment that is supposed to be positioned on the side of the ball of the foot, and that measures heel to ball of foot length.  This is to account for differences in toe length.  According to the article, whichever indicates the largest size is the size you should go with.  The following provides some explanation.  

Why Heel-to-Ball Is Essential

This illustration shows two feet which are the same length, but each require different size shoes. There are different fittings for short-toed feet and long-toed feet. Proper shoe-fitting incorporates not only overall length (heel-to-toe measurement) but also arch length (heel-to-ball measurement). Shoes are designed to flex at the ball of the foot. Correct fitting properly positions the ball joint in the shoe and provides room for the toes so they are not confined.

WITHOUT UTILIZING HEEL TO BALL MEASUREMENT

Improperly fitted shoes (shown right) can cause a variety of foot problems in addition to general discomfort and shoe breakdown. If the arch of the foot is not positioned properly in the shoe, the foot will become fatigued and uncomfortable.

Compare the arch length to the heel-to-toe length. Generally you'll use the larger of the two measurements as the correct shoe size. If the arch length and heel-to-toe length are the same, this will be the shoe size. If the heel-to-toe length is larger than the arch length, then fit to the heel-to-toe size. If arch length is larger than heel-to-toe, then fit to arch length.

EXAMPLE:

Heel-to-Toe Measurement	Arch Measurement	Shoe Size
8	8	8
8	8 1/2	8 1/2
8 1/2	8	8 1/2

It is important that both measurements be taken and compared to find the proper shoe size. Simply using the heel-to-toe length may result in an improper fit.

[Bubba136]

Lots of words about women’s shoes being uncomfortable but I haven’t read anywhere about women’s shoes being crafted to make their feet look small and dainty.  The fashion for over a couple of centuries has held that female feet are not part of their anatomy that should appear to be “large”.  Dainty is feminine.  Women’s shoes are  made to be close, or tight fitting. Large is masculine.   Men’s shoes are practIcal.  Whether dress shoes or work boots they are crafted to enhance masculine characteristics or to withstand work situations.  

Years ago, there was a member here that took a part time job as a salesperson in a women’s shoe store thinking that it would facilitate his access to buying heels for himself.  Which I it did.    As an aside to this experience, he enlightened many of us to his learning about women’s shoe buying habits and practices.  Mainly their insistence on purchasing footwear that was, on average, a whole size smaller or narrower than fit their feet properly.  Main reason, feminine appearance.  

 Now most of us here can personally attest to how uncomfortable and painful wearing ill fitting footwear can be.  Over the years, I have worn styles of heels that were very uncomfortable— but not for long.  I’ve obtained my “girls shoes” in every way conceivable. From buying on line to my wife buying them for me, as well as trying them on in stores,  

I wear heels of one style or another daily without discomfort of any sort.  Mainly because I only wear shoes that fit properly.  Granted, at my age, my feet tend to become tired if I wear 5” or 6” heel for extended periods.  But, rarely do I suffer from sore feet after a day in heels.  Bottom line, (observations by me, a man with a wife and two daughters) most women wear shoes that are poorly constructed or do not fit properly.  

 

 

Edited December 29, 2020 by Bubba136

[Jkrenzer]

Interesting point on sizing i never considered. I do have relatively short toes. Never thought that may actually be beneficial for my penchant to live in 5 inch single soled heels. Great luck for me.

[Shyheels]

I've long arches and that's why I've always had to get my hiking boots a size larger than the overall length might suggest.

 

[Puffer]

I have come across this article, which seems to accord with much of what has been said here already and may prove of interest:   https://discover.hubpages.com/style/Womens-shoes-are-sexist   Some of the linked material is enlightening too.

7 hours ago, Jkrenzer said:

Interesting point on sizing i never considered. I do have relatively short toes. Never thought that may actually be beneficial for my penchant to live in 5 inch single soled heels. Great luck for me.

How do you reach that conclusion?   The 'fitting' article was concerned with shoe length/size rather than the optimum heel height.

[mlroseplant]

So much great material to respond to in such a short time! I'll start with the most recent query by @Puffer. I believe @Jkrenzer comes to that conclusion by virtue of the fact that, given a constant foot length, the person with shorter toes, and conversely a longer arch length, will face a less steep rise back to the heel. Consider a right triangle where vertical side A represents an elevated heel, horizontal side B represents the empty space on the floor between stiletto tip and the point at which the sole begins to meet the floor, and side C, the hypotenuse, represents the person's arch length (heel-to-ball length). As side C gets longer, while side A remains the same, side B must also get a bit longer, thereby making the angle between sides B & C become shallower. I wish I knew how to make diagrams on here, but I hope it's figureable-outable.

The whole problem with this theory, if there is indeed a problem, is that it only works if the shoe actually follows the contours of the wearer's foot. Now that I have gotten this far into it, I have decided to take a picture to illustrate. I recently purchased a pair of very high heeled mules, half of which is pictured below. Although they are otherwise well constructed and are exactly the correct total length, they don't fit me very well. The two ball point pens demarcate the area where my toes and ball of foot should rest. The pen on the left points to where the end of my big toe should go. The pen on the right represents the point where the ball of my foot, as it meets the arch, should go. The trouble comes from the fact that this length is longer than the corresponding area on my personal foot. The ball of my foot, where it meets the arch, rests a considerable distance in front of where the ball point pen on the right is pointing to. If this shoe were designed for my personal foot, the distance between the pens should  be shorter, which would result in a much better fitting shoe that I could actually wear. It would also be much less steep as a result. I believe that is where Mr. Krenzer gets the idea that people with shorter toes in a given size can wear higher heels with more comfort, compared to people with longer toes. Within certain limitations, that is quite correct.

Now we get to talk about @RonC and his article, which is quite informative. It explains exactly what I have been attempting to explain in the above paragraphs, only you get very helpful illustrations. As Puffer pointed out, it really doesn't deal with heel height, at least not directly. It does neatly explain what the problem is with fitment, but comes up a little short on the solution when it comes to the instant case. The chart at the end gives examples of what size you should buy given your proper measurements on the Brannock device, and how to adjust the size for short arches vs. long arches. This is probably very good advice for flatter shoes, where the exact total length of the shoes matters far less. This is how @Shyheels gets away with wearing his hiking boots a size too long, in order to compensate for his long arches.

I do not think this method of coping with arch placement would work very well with high heels, as the fit has to be very precise to give any level of long term comfort. Having said that, I have in fact used this method in a couple of instances to some degree of success, but in order to make it work with high heels, you have to stuff something in the toes of your shoes to prevent your feet from sliding forward into the empty space at the front of the too-big shoes. This, naturally, only works on closed toed shoes, which limits my own ability to use this method much. In a perfect world, they would make 2 different models of the sandal pictured below, a long-toed version and a short-toed version. But that ain't never gonna happen.

And finally @Bubba136 . Yes, it became painfully obvious to me that women's shoes are generally built closer, tighter, and slimmer than the same style men's shoe when I tried to use some women's work "style" boots as actual work boots. Since they did fit me well, comfort was not the issue, but the appearance was shockingly different compared to everybody else's boots, and was noticed and commented on.

Edited December 29, 2020 by mlroseplant

[p1ng74]

24 minutes ago, mlroseplant said:

And finally @Bubba136 . Yes, it became painfully obvious to me that women's shoes are generally built closer, tighter, and slimmer than the same style men's shoe when I tried to use some women's work "style" boots as actual work boots. Since they did fit me well, comfort was not the issue, but the appearance was shockingly different compared to everybody else's boots, and was noticed and commented on.

 

The tricks to make women’s shoes look smaller and men’s shoes bigger without changing foot size are pretty simple and effective - thin, glued soles vs thick oversized overstitched soles, and higher heels slim the overall footprint.  I personally don’t like the bigfoot look, and I have small feet for my height anyway.  The slimmer look is one thing I enjoy about wearing heels.  

[Cali]

There is more to it as well. Woman's shoes are more pear shape: thinner heel and wider toe area. Men's shoes are more rectangular with similar heel and toe box width. I studied this after my last ankle reconstruction in 2011. I have more pear shaped feet. To get my toe box in almost all men's shoes I would need a men's 9.5 EE.  I would have a 1/2 inch gap on each side of my heel and extra length in the front - clown shoes.  Almost impossible to find any sandals whose ankle strap was short  enough to hold the sandals on.  My ankle problems came from trying to put my feet into men's shoes. Most of my shoes are women's size 10. I stopped buying men's shoes in 2010.

That's right: Men's (US) size 9.5 EE to Women's (US) size 10 m.

I also have a very high arch, another fun feature that contributes to my ankle issues. In flat (men's shoes) this forces my weight to the outside of my toe box. In a shoe with a heel, my arch is somewhat absorbed and I don't walk on the outside of my foot. Years of ill-fitting men's shoes has lead to major tendon, joint, and muscle issues.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Cali

[Puffer]

I follow (and agree with) melrose's mathematics - and with his suggestion that shorter toes will only benefit in high heels 'if the shoe actually follows the contours of the wearer's foot'.    It was my belief that Jkrenzer was probably not going to find that many of his shoes were a close match to his particular foot (short toes included!) that made me doubt that he was actually benefitting in terms of wearable heel height.   But as he seems comfortable in 5"+ heels (foot matching or not), he hasn't really got a problem - but could no doubt comment further on this.

[RonC]

Amazing where a short video from the 1960's has taken this conversation!  The point made by @Bubba136 is quite valid.  Womens shoes have historically been made to make the foot look smaller.  I do believe that is changing some, however, as I've seen some womens shoes these days that are getting close to @Cali noted clown shoes.  A hostess in a restaurant I picked up some food at on Christmas Eve was wearing one of the ugliest pairs of white booties.  Looked like maybe a Doc Martin style, white with a think black sole and elastic inserts near the ankle also in black.  They looked clunky as hell.  Likely quite comfortable for her, which I can understand for someone that has to be on her feet all day.  Maybe if they were at least black they wouldn't have looked so huge.'

@mlroseplant I am kind of surprised that the difference was noted in the work boots.  Just wouldn't have thought that, other than overall size, it would have been that much different.

 

[Shyheels]

I’ve certainly never noticed much difference in men’s and women’s hiking boots other than size and a narrower footbed. Some companies make non-leather hiking boots in different colours for women but the styling itself in not noticeably feminine.

[mlroseplant]

10 hours ago, Shyheels said:

I’ve certainly never noticed much difference in men’s and women’s hiking boots other than size and a narrower footbed. Some companies make non-leather hiking boots in different colours for women but the styling itself in not noticeably feminine.

Perhaps I am comparing apples to oranges. Regular women's work boots, i.e., those that are actually designed for women construction/shop workers, are not, as you say, a great deal different than the men's versions, other than the length and width. What I was attempting to do was wear a women's fashion boot, which was in the style of a work boot, as a real work boot. That is where the obvious slimmer profile came from. While I didn't mind coworkers calling them my "dancing shoes," I was dismayed at the lack of durability, even given my indoor job on smooth floors.

[Shyheels]

A few years ago I bought a pair of what were presented as hiking boots from a mountaineering store where once one would have been able to buy serious m ountaineering gear. The boots wore out astonishingly quickly. I complained, pointing out that I hadn't even been walking that much in them - no more than about five miles a day and in town at that. The hipster behind the counter said that the boots were never designed for that kind of hard use... 

[Pierre1961]

I have a hiking « Salomon » shoes. 
the shape is perfect. Good support for the arch. That what I meant when wrote the high heels shoes designers should improve 

paid 90 € 

[Puffer]

1 hour ago, Shyheels said:

A few years ago I bought a pair of what were presented as hiking boots from a mountaineering store where once one would have been able to buy serious m ountaineering gear. The boots wore out astonishingly quickly. I complained, pointing out that I hadn't even been walking that much in them - no more than about five miles a day and in town at that. The hipster behind the counter said that the boots were never designed for that kind of hard use... 

I trust that you made an issue out of what were clearly boots not fit for purpose and/or misrepresented.   Did you get any satisfaction?

[Shyheels]

16 minutes ago, Puffer said:

I trust that you made an issue out of what were clearly boots not fit for purpose and/or misrepresented.   Did you get any satisfaction?

I made an issue all right, but to no avail. THey wouldn't budge. The shoes had been worn outside so as far as they were concerned they were absolved of all liability. 

 

[Puffer]

Continuing the general theme of this topic, but diverging a little into the history and perception of the stiletto heel, I came across this lengthy PhD dissertation (apparently published in 2016) by a Canadian academic, Francesca D’Angelo: Standing Tall, The Stiletto Heel As Material Memory: A Contemporary Cross-Cultural Look At Perceptions Of The Stiletto Heel.   

 

Although much of the content is rather dry (and probably of limited interest to most of us), there are some interesting facts and opinions relating both to the history of the stiletto heel and to its wearers, supporters and opponents.   There are some illustrations but their quality is, alas, often poor.   It did seem to me however that the 'history' aspects, although clearly well-researched as a whole, failed to provide us with any greater detail of the development and increasing popularity (and height!) of stilettos in the late 50s/early 60s - although those aspects are covered in other works.   Other interesting sources are included in the extensive bibliography at the end.   

For those who wish to read it, here is a link: https://yorkspace.library.yorku.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10315/32766/DAngelo_Francesca_2016_PhD.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by Puffer
Added comment

[Shyheels]

Wow - interesting find! 

[Puffer]

7 minutes ago, Shyheels said:

I made an issue all right, but to no avail. THey wouldn't budge. The shoes had been worn outside so as far as they were concerned they were absolved of all liability. 

That is absurd!   The retailer might as well have argued that they should never have even been put on your feet.   Probably not (in financial terms) a candidate for legal action but I would certainly have pursued the matter with higher command and Trading Standards.

[at9]

10 minutes ago, Puffer said:

That is absurd!   The retailer might as well have argued that they should never have even been put on your feet.   Probably not (in financial terms) a candidate for legal action but I would certainly have pursued the matter with higher command and Trading Standards.

The relevant UK legislation is the Consumer RIghts Act (2015) or if earlier, its predecessor, the Sale of Goods Act. Both require goods to be "of merchantable quality" and "fit for purpose".

Standard steps in the UK: Put the complaint in writing. If no satisfaction send "Letter Before Action" saying you will take the matter to the County Court in (typically) 14 days. I've had to do this a couple of times and was successful; companies will usually resolve a problem before going to court. Win or lose, it costs them too much to go to court for a small claim so they might as well settle. The small claims procedure in the County Court is very simple, all online, and you can't be hit with costs if you lose.

Shame it's too late now.

[Shyheels]

it wasn't worth it. i just learned a lesson for next time

[RonC]

2 hours ago, Puffer said:

For those who wish to read it, here is a link: https://yorkspace.library.yorku.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10315/32766/DAngelo_Francesca_2016_PhD.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

While I have no desire to read all 250 or so pages, this looks to be an interesting study.  Seems the author is not condemning heels and concludes that people should be able to wear whatever they please without question or ridicule from others.

[mlroseplant]

On 12/30/2020 at 9:12 AM, Puffer said:

Continuing the general theme of this topic, but diverging a little into the history and perception of the stiletto heel, I came across this lengthy PhD dissertation (apparently published in 2016) by a Canadian academic, Francesca D’Angelo: Standing Tall, The Stiletto Heel As Material Memory: A Contemporary Cross-Cultural Look At Perceptions Of The Stiletto Heel.   

 

Although much of the content is rather dry (and probably of limited interest to most of us), there are some interesting facts and opinions relating both to the history of the stiletto heel and to its wearers, supporters and opponents.   There are some illustrations but their quality is, alas, often poor.   It did seem to me however that the 'history' aspects, although clearly well-researched as a whole, failed to provide us with any greater detail of the development and increasing popularity (and height!) of stilettos in the late 50s/early 60s - although those aspects are covered in other works.   Other interesting sources are included in the extensive bibliography at the end.   

For those who wish to read it, here is a link: https://yorkspace.library.yorku.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10315/32766/DAngelo_Francesca_2016_PhD.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

 

 

On 12/30/2020 at 11:50 AM, RonC said:

While I have no desire to read all 250 or so pages, this looks to be an interesting study.  Seems the author is not condemning heels and concludes that people should be able to wear whatever they please without question or ridicule from others.

While I did not read all of it carefully, I did dive in and skim most of it. I could do that because, having read several doctoral dissertations over the years, this particular one is written far less.  .  . how shall we say.  .  . "densely".  .  . than others I've had past experience with. Whether that is good or bad, I do not know.

There is a really fluffy prologue/introduction, the likes of which I've never seen before in an academic paper, but then things pick up a bit in the main body of it. The middle section is pretty interesting, where differing attitudes toward stiletto heels between Canadian and Italian women are explored in great detail. Toward the end of the paper, things go downhill a bit for most of us on this site. It seems there is an attitude toward gendered clothing that is the exact opposite of what most of us have personally experienced. Starting with Deuteronomy 22:5 (the ancient Jewish proscription against men and women wearing each other's gendered clothing), which this author almost turns on its head in my opinion, the paper becomes largely a rant about how gendered clothing has hurt women in general. Totally missing is the fact that, in the end, the female can wear whatever she wants and be accepted, but the male cannot.

Although men wearing high heels is eventually mentioned, it is dismissed as a sort of power grab by us (I'm oversimplifying a bit), essentially saying, "Look, it takes a man to show you how to wear high heels." She was referencing a series of quotes about a high heeled male dance trio that appeared on "Britain's Got Talent" a number of years ago. I am quite sure that has not been one single person's experience. It is not a power grab, and I have a feeling that the author has no idea how difficult life is for us heel wearing men. The other obvious lack in this paper, and I may have missed this, there is no mention anywhere of people who actually like the feeling of wearing and walking in high heels. Sure, a number of women were interviewed during research who enjoy wearing heels often, but no one that likes to wear heels for the sake of wearing heels--there was always some external factor cited. I believe that the majority of people on this site like to wear heels for their own sake--we have that luxury, at least. Now I'm tired of talking about this. I've already done too much. Bye!

[Shyheels]

You make some valid criticisms about this dissertation. It does feel like it lacks academic rigour, to put it mildly. While the woman obvious did a great deal of research into the subject, she needed much better direction from her supervisor and to have thought out/explored her points in much greater depth. As you say, the rant about gendered clothing felt shallow and while she might have felt that a dissertation on stilettos would 'naturally' focus primarily on women she could have restored a sense of balance to that particular segment with just a well-placed paragraph. Her evidence of a male 'power grab' by wearing heels is thin at best.

Like somany academics she seems to believe that nothing can happen without structured reasoning and purpose - nobody, in her world, could wear heels simply because they love the look and style. They do so for specific purposes and reasons, which can be dissected and discussed. 

[Puffer]

I think those of us who have so far at least skimmed through the dissertation would agree that it adds very little to our knowledge of stiletto heels in terms of history, enthusiasm or market - and nothing at all to raise the profile of the male heel wearer, or to encourage anyone to try them.   But I assume the author got her PhD (or some credits towards it) and considers her hard work worthwhile, even though we might not.

[Bubba136]

I try very hard to avoid material such as this because authors usually present views that are self-serving or have selfish motives.  Besides, regardless of what anyone thinks or says, it wouldn’t make any difference.  I just want to enjoy wearing my heels and try not to think that hard about it.  

[mlroseplant]

16 hours ago, Puffer said:

I think those of us who have so far at least skimmed through the dissertation would agree that it adds very little to our knowledge of stiletto heels in terms of history, enthusiasm or market - and nothing at all to raise the profile of the male heel wearer, or to encourage anyone to try them.   But I assume the author got her PhD (or some credits towards it) and considers her hard work worthwhile, even though we might not.

I said I would not waste any more time on this, but I lied. I looked her up. She was awarded her Ph.D. in 2016. In a twist that is stranger than fiction, she evidently teaches at a college from which my niece graduated several years ago.

Unfortunately, a lot of people have this mistaken idea that most "academics" are like this--both kind of fluffy and yet arrogant at the same time*. If they are female, possibly they hate men, as well. I can assure you, having grown up within academia, and now having completely left it, nothing can be further from the truth. Most academics truly wish to share what they've learned over, in many cases, a lifetime of study. Most female academics do not hate men, though how that is I've no idea, given some of the stories I've heard about unfair gender discrimination in the realm of higher education, some of it committed by my own father.

* I've no idea whether Dr. D'Angelo is arrogant or not, but she certainly comes off that way in the last third of her dissertation. Maybe I just take it a bit too personally.

Edited January 2, 2021 by mlroseplant
Further thoughts

[Bubba136]

As of this date, I have not heard of victims of this type of “discrimination” shouting loudly for reparations, so perhaps your analysis is just in time for victims to stir the pot and surface the problem in time to reap millions in payback payments?  You should definitely demand at least 10%  for bringing such an outrageous type of discrimination to the public’s attention?