Broke my own rules.

[CrushedVamp]

On 1/14/2026 at 5:42 AM, mlroseplant said:

Haha, I never said that you were. I thought your intent was very clear--to present an interesting snippet of googledom for our consideration. My consideration was I thought it funny that this particular snippet said the opposite of other snippets I'd seen in the past, when in fact I'm not sure any of it makes any difference whatsoever. But, somebody evidently went to at least some trouble to create a diagram saying.  .  . well, I'm not sure what.

Yes, I understand.

It surprises me too how a Pinterest Algorithm can set myself up to be bombarded with high heel wearing depictions. It is as if the whole world wears high heels and we have not seen that since the 1950’s and 1980’s.

Yet we know the truth, but that is just the world today. No one actually does the things they claim they know so much about. Not to get into a tirade railing against “youtube influencers”… which I think is a misnomer because really, who the heck are they truly influencing? But I digress. It just seems so many people have an opinion on something that they never actually engage in… like having many depictions of how to choose comfortable high heels when no one is wearing them.

 I think it is why I come back to this site so often: most members on here are authentic. I appreciate and respect that.

[mlroseplant]

It is true! We will give you honest, real-life answers on here that you won't find on Instagram. It's strange that I have never actually seen a pair of Louboutins in the wild, but you'd think everybody was wearing them if you looked at my social media feeds. I am not sure that I've even seen 12 cm in real life either (non platform). There are only a handful of folks on Instagram who can actually walk well in 12 cm, and I can tell you I'm not one of them. Maybe I will be sometime in 2026. But yeah, I'm not going to blow smoke up anybody's nether regions about it either. It's not an easy skill!

[higherheels]

I'm glad that I'm not active on social media and only witnessing a few things via other channels. It probably gives a warped view on reality for many people.

I also rarely seen Louboutins and any real high heels in the wild.

[Gige]

On 1/11/2026 at 10:47 PM, Shyheels said:

Go-go boots certainly evoke an era - one that was bright, colourful and optimistic. For those of us who love fashion boots they were also a major cultural stepping stone. When Andre Courreges came out with the go-go boots in 1964 he very neatly tapped into the mod Sixties zeitgeist - the space age was one of his influences - and his sassy white boots became one of the defining looks of the decade. Boots were also given a basic boost by Roger Vivier who reimagined a 17th century musketeers cuissardes as the modern thigh boot in 1963, and by Nancy Sinatra whose hit These Boots Were Made for Walking in 1965 boosted boot sales dramatically on both sides of the Atlantic. By the end of the decade boots were a fashion staple for empowered women and they've remained so ever since.

And yes go-go boots typically had lower heels - about twi inches and some even lower. I think Correges original go-go boots had pretty much standard heels of an inch or so. My attraction to them is not for their heels but for their styling and their evocation of an era and because when I was a kid and saw them being worn I really, really wanted a pair. I've never bought myself any because I can't find nice ones, alas - I'd be happy to do so if I could, but the only ones I find are in costume shops. There is too, as you point out, a difficulty in figuring out what to pair them with.  Back in the 60s it tended to be mini skirts but I wear jeans and have not figured how I can make that work with shiny white patent go go boots! 

 

First - thank you for a wonderfully written response! I always greatly appreciate well-crafted responses and as hard as I may try, mine sometimes miss the mark, usually due to typos or not making my point as clear and concise as possible. In other words, I am an overly wordy, horrible proof-reader. 

With respect to the idea of go-go boots as a form of female empowerment, I would be very interested to read the scholarly research on such. It is quite conceivable that an argument could be made that, along with the bikini and mini-skirt, go-go boots did much to help women's empowerment following their introduction. A counter argument could be made, however, that they were simply a fashion idea that hit at the right time. Still, another argument could be made that certain forms of "feminine" footwear, such as over-the-knee boots and stiletto heels, had a greater impact on women's empowerment than go-go boots or loafers/flats. I would argue that loafers/flats, and tailored pants/trousers did much for those women who wanted to proverbially throw off the yolk of wearing heels and dresses all the time as their mothers may have done. Go-go boots at their height of their popularity, by contrast, did bring with them a sense of generational change that is typical as children often do not want to be their parents. I do not know if I would go so far as to say that such is an act of "rebellion" but more so, just a sense that what was the "norm" for our parents is not for us. I think a contemporary example is the pre-torn jeans look. For some, it may be great but for me, it is sloppy and unkept, and that which I hope fades away.  Again, I am sure there is a body of literature on the societal impact of go-go boots, but I, however, do not know what it may conclude. Regardless, a great response for excellent discussion! 

 

[Shyheels]

It wasn’t go-go boots specifically but tall boots in general that became the fashion staple of the empowered independent women by the end of the 60s.