INTRODUCING: Luxury Fashion Forums response to men in heels

[kneehighs]

"Ooops, I did it again," this time, at:

http://www.luxuryfashion.com/phpBB2/index.php in the Pink Lounge, under the thread titled, ANNOUNCING NEW HIGH HEELS FASHION?

Have some fun and check it out!

Also, Genebujold posted a thread here too, in the Cult Items, under the thread titled, [ Poll ] Fashion trend or fashion intrusion?

Have some fun and check it out!

[Alex]

What an amazing display of the worst kind of ignorance. Those people need a reality check

[xaphod]

Oh, BTW, lose the comma at the end of the URL, or some browsers won't find the link. I know it's a bit pompous, but I suspect the IQ of the 'lux group' is on a par with Victoria Beckham, and, as I have said before, I find her synonymous with 'irrelevant'. We are bombarded with images of 'beautiful people' and I suspect the 'lux group' aspire to this false Hollywood ideal. All the ordinary people out there just have to make the best of what they have got. Like me, I'm 5'8" and bald .... no doubt the 'lux group' would say something like 'eeeew eew ewww .... that's soooo gross'. Well, tough shit, that's the way I am. I'm quite happy with the way some others regard me, especially the g/f of the guy who keeps his boat next to mine in the marina. As I was backing out of my berth, she says 'you're looking good Xa' .... and she wasn't looking at my boat ! Xa

[genebujold]

I think the comparison between the two threads on that board is proof positive that the subtle approach works better towards fostering acceptance than going over the top. Generally, anything that's new to any society is usually regarded with initial resistance, and the stranger it is to that society, the more resistance you'll find. Too strange and you'll actually foster a backlash.

It's a balance, really - if you go too easy you'll never get enough exposure to get the idea across. Too hard and you'll generate so much resistance it can significantly delay acceptance, or even kill the concept for good. There's a "sweet spot" with most things, and our hobby is no exception.

By the way - here's the latest from "Fashion Trend or Fashion Exclusion?"

I hope you see the method to my madness...

http://www.luxuryfashion.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=378796#378796

By the way - get out there and vote in the poll on this post! It takes just two minutes to create an account (and no personal info, just like HH Meeting place).

It would certainly help advance our cause.

Thank you in advance.

[Firefox]

I think it's totally a dead end approach to try and convince people who are posting on these fashion boards. They're usually intolerant stereoptyped kind of people and you wont get anywhere. The best policy is wear them in public with coordinating fashion and let the shoes do the talking. There's no harm in trying though! Good luck in your enterprises.

[genebujold]

I think it's totally a dead end approach to try and convince people who are posting on these fashion boards. They're usually intolerant stereoptyped kind of people and you wont get anywhere. The best policy is wear them in public with coordinating fashion and let the shoes do the talking.

There's no harm in trying though! Good luck in your enterprises.

I couldn't agree more, and thank you for the wish of luck.

As the rest of you may know, it's often been shown that poll results are very convincing, as people do tend to blindly believe in statistics and "if everyone else is thinking this way, then I must be wrong..."

It ties hand in hand with a strong desire to belong, which is strongest among those who're big into fashion - they all want to belong.

So - please participate in the polls on the other website and change the world!

Or at least our part of it.

[NikkiHH]

I would have to agree with firefox and xaphod on this - most of the comments on that board were pretty dim, e.g. "only tranny men should wear heels" What sort of bizarre statement is that?

[genebujold]

All the ordinary people out there just have to make the best of what they have got. Like me, I'm 5'8" and bald .... no doubt the 'lux group' would say something like 'eeeew eew ewww .... that's soooo gross'. Well, tough shit, that's the way I am.

I'm quite happy with the way some others regard me, especially the g/f of the guy who keeps his boat next to mine in the marina. As I was backing out of my berth, she says 'you're looking good Xa' .... and she wasn't looking at my boat !

Xa

Xa, you hit it - I'd give it (your beautiful skull) a rub if I were there! But while these divas on the board represent billions of fashion dollars and may very well so strongly influence the fashion industry as to cause them drop all high-heel manufacturing above size 9, they represent neither the average woman nor the average man...

Give me a break! If I were a fat-assed (or bellied), jeans-wearing boy from Alabama who wandered into Harrahs one day in heels, I'd have been ousted in a New York minute!

They let me stay for two reasons:

1. I'm spending money.

2. My attire, including conservative heels isn't causing anyone else to stop spending their own money.

That's just the way it is here in Vegas, folks, where the casinos and all other businesses are operated on a "for profit" basis, which means any customer who imposes on that profit, for whatever reason, is subject to discharge from the premises.

And I've seen people discharged for wearing offensive shirts.

They're in it for the money, not the political sensitivities.

And, yes - I've been so discharged by two casinos for no other reason than I walked in wearing heels.

I won't say who discharged me, as both happen to be business customers of mine, but I hope you can appreciate not only the fine line I walk but also the fact that as one who is perhaps more attuned to the sensibilities of others, I may have something of value to say with respect to how best to win over the antagonists?

Casinos are like any other business. You do anything to reduce the income stream, and they'll toss you out. You scream rights and they'll scream bloody murder.

On the other hand, I've walked into more than three dozen casinos wearing heels (and about three wearing a skirt), and none of them batted an eye.

Why?

Bear in mind that while casinos are in it for the money, the public is in it for the stature, and money is but one measurement of stature.

Back to why? Because I'm spending money and I've dressed conservatively enough so as to prevent anyone else who might be spending money to move to another casino!

Fasion and money are inseperable, gents. The only way we can combat both is to:

1. Buy from those who're willing to cater to our needs. Case in point, the online boot distributor recently posted.

2. Inform other manufacturers they're not meeting our needs, and why.

3. Let those from whom we've bought know both what as well as why we'd like to see in the future.

If fashion consumers don't take a proactive stance by letting the fashion designers know in no uncertain terms what we want, we'll forever be relegated to hand-me-downs!

It's your own world, so fight for it!!!

[Robert]

Unbelievable! If one says no, the other one says no too :x

[shyguy]

Women in tarpaulins eeeeeeeeewwww No way that's just gross get real etc. etc. etc. But realistically you could have stumbled on a whole new market for tarpaulin sellers everywhere.

[Firefox]

Another thing to remember is they get eeewwww credits and bonus points for the number of o's in soooooo and special awards for overuse of the words "gross" and "sucks", so the opinions you hear are inflated by those factors I mean it's like soooooooooo totally like gross and soooooo like totally not cool to underuse the word eeeewwwwww!

[asdf174]

Well I'm straight and I wear heels, responses like that and insults to the types of shoes I wear like that kind of tick me off. (I wear mostly those stellitos plats they wear makeing fun of.) I try not pay to much attention to those board post anymore because I know all the responsed are going to be negative like that. Don't kow why. I mean I can understand the fact that its different but don't understand why its offensive, or even how its GROSS? I think its kind of interesting how people link sexuality between the two subjects to. I can understand kinda why though. I just still thinks its interesting. I guess my point is thier just shoes why such a big deal? Thats how I've been looking at it for a while now.

[Dr. Shoe]

Speaking of linking sex to fashion a "friend" who knew of my cross dressing once asked me what I wear to masturbate. Without replying I asked him what he would wear, he told me to mind my own business! Cheek!

[asdf174]

btw nicely said genebujold.

[Rockpup]

I'll only wear tarpaulins if I see Jesica wearing tarpaulins... Said not having one clue what tarpaulins are. I will now find out. Jim

[larry]

Now that really pisses me off. The beautifull people of this world are the ones to set the fashion trends and we must abide by them? Who are they to pontificate over me and assume that because I wear heels that I must be gay. This is STUPID! I'm neither gay nor homo-phobic and my stocking and heel wearing is of a sexual nature. Furthermore, I'm only average in looks and I hope that those beautifull people can forgive me for not living up to their exalted standards.....Larry.

[genebujold]

Tarpaulins? Water-proofed canvas? Isn't that be a little stiff for clothing? Then again, the May 2004 issue of Bicycling depicted a model wearing a variety of clothing styles made from recycled black rubber innertubes. What a way to get a rash! All for the sake of ecology, I suppose... Back to tarpaulins, being the sailor that I am (not much opportunity here in Vegas, though), I would like to share the interesting history of that word. It begins with "pall," which is a draping, a material used to cover something. The term "pall-bearer" describes those who bear a casket from one location to another - and the casket is usually draped with a cloth (pall), often a flag. On ships they used to use canvas palls as lightweight covers for things like hatches and dinghies, and even to cover the sheet (sail) when it was folded on the boom. They called it a "palling." Problem is, canvas leaks, so they coated it in tar, hence the term "tar-palling." As language changed, it became known as a "tarpaulin," similar to how the "steering board" side of the boat/ship came to be known as "starboard." Since steering boards were flimsy before they were centrally relocated and became known as rudders, ships would put the left side of the boat/ship against the dock when they pulled into port, which is why the left side of the ship is called "port." As Paul Harvey says, "and now you know the rest of the story..." Back to heels: You guys are too much! Firefox's "eeeeewwww credits..." Fortunately, the "beautiful people" only dictate fashion to their own tiny little rich bitch circles. It's an incestuous relationship, actually, where they constantly check their own sense of fashion amongst themselves. Heaven help them if one of them should ever decide to wear anything that didn't meet with the approval of the others! Why, they'd be eternally banned from all parties! Hey, I sometimes hang with the elite as they're my clients, so I hear it all the time, particularly at the "exclusive" parties where you have to go through three bodyguarded checkpoints complete with access rosters just to get in. Some of the ladies are quite nice. Others talk incessantly about fashion, and engage in what can only be described as mutual demeaning where a group of two to five talk badly about how the others outside their little group are dressed. Why? Because they're insecure and usually married the money (and their husbands married their looks). Fortunately, many rich ladies are a wonderful mix of grace, beauty, and elegance. They're the ones whom the rich-bitches' husbands usually wind up talking to while the whores gather to put down everyone else in a pathetic attempt to gain relative emotional standing for their soul. And the elegant ones are the ones who would never frequent the fashion boards, as they abhore the incessantly condescending attitudes of those who do. They're often far more tolerant, too. So Emery, you said it best: "Don’t look for approval of an unusual fashion like Men in Heels on a women’s fashion forum. Such sites are set up to perform a normative function, to let women know what type of clothing and behavior is most widely popular and socially favored at the moment; it is to reassure them that others are wearing the same thing."

[new_look]

when you adapt to a board such as this where people speak of positives and ho people dont care etc, it does a good job on dampening confidence when you read every post on the fashion forum. It is an insult to any heelwearing man, or anyone with half a scrap of intelligence to think what theyre typing for just one second. Itd be interesting to ask them to explain why a different shoe makes someone gay etc. And id be also inclined to say that i, and probably most lads can walk better and in higher heels than some women you see out there. The snipey comment about the man having to have support cos he couldnt stand in them is very annoying. call me daft but reading such things does a great job on making me feel down.

[genebujold]

when you adapt to a board such as this where people speak of positives and ho people dont care etc, it does a good job on dampening confidence when you read every post on the fashion forum.

Call me daft but reading such things does a great job on making me feel down.

No need to get the blues, Daz - they're in their own little microcosm. They don't value anyone's opinion that falls outside of their very limited understanding of fashion, and their own opinions are important only to themselves.

Keep walking tall.

Then again, we could always invade their site and respond to posts like "wine colored uggs.... what do u think?" and go "EEEEWWWWW! That is sooooooo gross! Why would any woman want to wear those, anyway? That is just so freaky, know what I mean...."

Speaking of which, what the heck is an "ugg?"

I think the best response to a woman saying, "why would any man want to wear heels?" is "why do women wear heels?"

[azraelle]

Rather than snip and snipe at them why don't you, nicely, intelligently, invite them to our site?? Human beings DO have the capacity to change, and learn from mistakes made, just like other animals. Why not give them the benefit of the doubt??

[sscotty727]

Personally I agree with Firefox on this one. Continuing to debate them on their websites is just going to cause negative reactions. These people are set in their ways and are unlikely to change by arguing. The argument will just turn to nasty "Ewwwww" and "How gay", etc. I think the best way for us to effect change is to just get out there in our heels and wear them proudly and confidently. You never saw guys asking permission to wear earrings. Guys just started wearing them and slowly fashion caught on and now they wear them as normal as anything else. Scotty

[azraelle]

You're right, they ARE a humourless bunch. I did get a positive reaction to one post, though. And another told me to go back to hell where I came from--I had the audacity to disagree with her diatribe against Israel championing the pooor Palestinians that have been deprived of running water by the big bad nasty mean Israelies in retaliation for being bombed. Imagine that.

[TXT-1]

"EEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWW" ...sounds like something a girl would say if she stepped in/on a dog turd! closed minded idiot masses no opinion of their own, sheep! BAA! later, TXT-1

[xaphod]

"EEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWW" ...sounds like something a girl would say if she stepped in/on a dog turd!

TXT-1

.... as she slid, off balance, along the sidewalk, before landing on her liposuctioned bony arse.

Xa

[Jamie001]

Gene,

You could have sued the casinos that kicked you out for wearing heels for sexual discrimination. Were there any women in the casino wearing heels? If so, then it is illegal for them to kick you out. I think that you gave millions of dollars that you would have won in a law suit.

Jamie

Xa, you hit it - I'd give it (your beautiful skull) a rub if I were there! But while these divas on the board represent billions of fashion dollars and may very well so strongly influence the fashion industry as to cause them drop all high-heel manufacturing above size 9, they represent neither the average woman nor the average man...

Give me a break! If I were a fat-assed (or bellied), jeans-wearing boy from Alabama who wandered into Harrahs one day in heels, I'd have been ousted in a New York minute!

They let me stay for two reasons:

1. I'm spending money.

2. My attire, including conservative heels isn't causing anyone else to stop spending their own money.

That's just the way it is here in Vegas, folks, where the casinos and all other businesses are operated on a "for profit" basis, which means any customer who imposes on that profit, for whatever reason, is subject to discharge from the premises.

And I've seen people discharged for wearing offensive shirts.

They're in it for the money, not the political sensitivities.

And, yes - I've been so discharged by two casinos for no other reason than I walked in wearing heels.

I won't say who discharged me, as both happen to be business customers of mine, but I hope you can appreciate not only the fine line I walk but also the fact that as one who is perhaps more attuned to the sensibilities of others, I may have something of value to say with respect to how best to win over the antagonists?

Casinos are like any other business. You do anything to reduce the income stream, and they'll toss you out. You scream rights and they'll scream bloody murder.

On the other hand, I've walked into more than three dozen casinos wearing heels (and about three wearing a skirt), and none of them batted an eye.

Why?

Bear in mind that while casinos are in it for the money, the public is in it for the stature, and money is but one measurement of stature.

Back to why? Because I'm spending money and I've dressed conservatively enough so as to prevent anyone else who might be spending money to move to another casino!

Fasion and money are inseperable, gents. The only way we can combat both is to:

1. Buy from those who're willing to cater to our needs. Case in point, the online boot distributor recently posted.

2. Inform other manufacturers they're not meeting our needs, and why.

3. Let those from whom we've bought know both what as well as why we'd like to see in the future.

If fashion consumers don't take a proactive stance by letting the fashion designers know in no uncertain terms what we want, we'll forever be relegated to hand-me-downs!

It's your own world, so fight for it!!!

[sscotty727]

Here is something different I happened across.

Mister Poll: Men's Fashion Freedom

And another.....

Men's Fashion Polls

Check out the results BEFORE you vote!

Scotty

[new_look]

i noted the latter question which said, women can wear mens clothes but men cant wear womens' although pleasing most of the results are, 11% are still living in a stuck up their own ass world, agreeing with the above

[sscotty727]

Here are the results pages for the two listed above:

Mister Poll: Men's Fashion Freedom Results

and

Men's Fashion Polls Results

Scotty

[genebujold]

Gene,

You could have sued the casinos that kicked you out for wearing heels for sexual discrimination. Were there any women in the casino wearing heels? If so, then it is illegal for them to kick you out. I think that you gave millions of dollars that you would have won in a law suit.

Jamie

This is not true.

Any place of business has the right to establish a dress code for both their employees as well as their customers, for reasons of health, safety, or business image - and this includes a mandate to wear a uniform, even if it's just for "esprit de corps." Those not meeting the dress code can be reprimanded, fired, or in the case of customers, removed from the premises.

The only exception is when the person being fired or removed can prove that there was no hazard to either safety or health or that their choice of attire was either not in violation of a uniform requirement, or not costing the business in any manner. The problem is, that's often very difficult to prove, and as often as not, they can think of tons of ways your choice of attire would cost them business.

Example - if a factory worker chooses to wear a blue shirt as opposed to a red shirt, that is allowed, unless a red shirt is a part of a mandated uniform, at which point the choice is "if you want to work here you'll have to wear the same uniform as the rest of us."

I require my consultants to wear a suit and tie when meeting with clients in our boardroom or working with them on their premises. If no clients are around, however, they're free to loose the suit and tie, but they must still wear the suit pants and white shirt.

Why? Because our business is a professional one, and anything less than a professional image hurts our business. They're more than willing - I profit-share, and all of them know that if lost a client it would cost all of us, including them, big bucks.

As for a dress code for customers, it's entirely enforceable. No shoes? That's a health code violation, and if inspectors enter the premisis while you're feet our bare, we're the ones who get fined, not you, so out!

Wearing a bikini? Sorry, but you cannot gamble or even wander the casino in swimwear, as it might distract the dealers, and that could cost either the casino money, or a customer money. If it distracted another player and caused them to loose money, they could sue the casino for allowing someone to play while wearing a bikini!

A decision about whether or not to allow a man wearing heels to remain on premisis isn't made by the floor-level security personnel. Whether the man is spotted by security on the floor or via camera, if there's any question in their minds they immediately call a security chief who, if guidance has already been written on this, makes a decision based upon the guidance, which will usually read something like this:

Section 16 - Distractions and Disruptions

Item 248 - Man wearing women's clothing

Item 248a - Man wearing skirt - evaluate situation. If man remains to himself and other customers either do not notice or their actions do not appear to be distracted, continue to monitor.

Item 248b - Man wearing bra and falsies - remove from premises

Item 248c - Man wearing heels - evaluate situation. If man remains to himself and other customers either do not notice or their actions do not appear to be distracted, continue to monitor.

Item 249 - Woman wearing bikini - ask if they're moving from pool to hotel room. If not, remove from premises (non-guests) or escort to room (guests). Politely reminded them to refrain from wandering about the casino in swimwear.

If the situation isn't covered, there's another entry:

Having said all of that, if you're working in the accounting section of a corporation and your choice of wearing heels isn't causing other employees to complain, disrupting their work, or causing them to request transfers or quit, them you would have every right to continue to wear heels.

If your choice of attire was costing the company money, however, for whatever reason, it would be within their legal right to take the appropriate steps to mitigate their losses. They would be required to inform you of the situation, and ask that you made a different choice. If you refused, they could either codify a dress code, and enforce it by keeping you off the premises until you complied, at a cost to you of your leave/sick days, or they could simply terminate your employment.

Believe it or not, towns that are incorporated, particularly towns that derive any sizeable portion of their income from tourism, have the same legal rights to create, and enforce, dress codes.

Fortunately, there isn't anything prohibiting men from wearing heels here in Vegas, and provided I don't make a spectacle of myself by suing casinos for keeping me out, there won't be any such law.

The most important point, however, is this: Casinos are my clients. If I sued one, I'd be out of business faster than a New York second!!!

And given the laws in this country, state, and town, they will most certainly win, so it would have been a very stupid and expensive move on my part.

No - it was far better for me to simply say, "Ok," and find a different casino, the vast majority of which don't have any problems with it, provided you're not creating a spectacle of yourself.

[genebujold]

Here are the results pages for the two listed above:

Mister Poll: Men's Fashion Freedom Results

and

Men's Fashion Polls Results

Scotty

Interesting poll! Unfortunately, as a certified statistician it appears to me that the results are a victem of statistics, which never lies itself, but will usually produce incorrect results when either the questions are not properly worded, the statistical analysis is improperly conducted by the statistician (or lack thereof), or the sample is not representative of the population as a whole.

Hello, I'm Gene' Bujold, and we're here to talk about statistics...

In this case, the questions are ok, and the "analysis" is simple algebra, counting what percentage of each option is compared to all the options for any particular question.

The problem is, the sample is not an accurate representation of the population as a whole.

I'll spare you the details, but I strongly believe that if you were to achieve a truely random sample with a high enough response rate, these questions would produce significantly different results. The problem is, the web sites conducting the poll are often magnets for those who advocate these choices, and not at all a representative sample of the population as a whole.

Example: "For men - would you wear stockings?" 43% chose the "Yes, I'm wearing stockings right now" response.

Really! Amost half of all men wear stockings? I don't think so...

Now - just imagine what the results of the poll would look like if it were conducted on Elle.com or FashionLuxury.com?

Since we're already seen the results through many highly intellectual arguements posted there such as "eeewwww!" and "yech!" and "not on MY man!" there is little doubt that the responses there would have significantly skewed in the opposite direction.

About a year ago I posted a poll on a board whose discussion topics had little to do with fashion. In fact, the general focus was Christianity.

I was actually quite surprised at the results and the comments that accompanied them, for expected they would give the old "but that's sinful!" response. While less than 20% said they thought it would be ok if a man wore heels, more than half thought it was ok for a man to wear a skirt or robe as is the common practice in many areas of the world (and missionaries definately have been all over the world, so they would know).

Only three narrow-minded people of the more than forty who responded with comments like "that's against the Bible, so it's sin," forgetting, of course, that Jesus and his disciples all wore garments with the same cut as a modern dress...

Then, the idiotic jerk that was the board's moderator trumped up a ficticious charge and booted me off the board. I appealed to the board's owners and was reinstated, but the jerk trumped up three more charges, supposedly from valid posters who said I'd sent them unacceptable private messages (posters which weren't there before the incident and who haven't posted since), and the owners decided enough was enough and I was again booted, to the shock of some of my on-line frieds. When I told them what had happened, they posted their concerns.

And they were booted as well, for "disagreeing with a moderator's decision."

So, while I think the average person out there can accept the idea of men wearing heels, and that in some circles there's widespread endorsement, I also know that many individuals would just as soon adopt Hitlerian Gestapo tactics and "quash the uprising."