Minimum height for a high heel

[Guy N. Heels]

What would you consider would be the minimum height for a heel to truly be considered a High Heel? This measurment is the distance from the floor to the highest part of the insole of the shoe (minus any platform, if present) Please keep in mind that this is not necessarily the minimum heel height that you wear personally, and neither should it be the minimum height that you would like to see (on yourself, girlfriend, wife, boyfriend, etc.). The question is intended to establish the point at which a shoe ceases to be an "ordinary" shoe or boot and falls into the category that any manufacturer, advertiser, seller would call a High Heel.

[chris100575]

I'm voting for three inches, quite high in the smaller sizes. Chris

[Dawn HH]

I voted for 3", although I limit myself to that there is no telling how much longer I can mainain that standard without having to go lower. Perish the thought--- Cheers--- Dawn HH

[dr1819]

I see there's a consensus of sorts at 3". However, how high a heel feels is dependant on several factors, principle of which is the length of one's foot. Shoe construction has a lot to do with things, too. I have a pair of 5" wedge heels (3/4" platform) I can wear all day (and have been wearing since I first got up this morning - it's now 12:34 pm). That's a rise of 4-1/4". But I also have a pair of 3-3/4" stilletto sandals I had to return because they were just too high for me, but my 4" heeled knee-high boots are perfectly fine.

[Guy N. Heels]

I totally agree that shoe construction and even the size and weight of the individual play a huge role in the comfort level of a shoe. However, this now becomes a very subjective matter and is really outside of the scope of the poll. For example, I have seen preteenage children walking around in 2 inch "kitten heels" that, for them, looked quite high. I have even seen children's shoes on sale for preschool age children with little 1.5 heels that were hardly more than toys, but would be a challenge to these youngsters. Still, any knowledgeable adult knows that a 2" heel hardly qualifies as a HIGH heel.

[jmc]

I think 3 inches is reasonable. For most of us the height starts to affect one's balance at that point.

[highheeltrained]

anything under 5 inch heels is not worth it.

[Guy N. Heels]

anything under 5 inch heels is not worth it.

So sorry that I couldn't accomodate you on the poll. I had listed heights up to 5" but all that was deleted when I posted. Apparently 10 items is all that can be accepted on a poll. So I'll put you down as one vote for 5". (Did you change the numbers in any way?)

Of course, as you can see for yourself, you're definitely in the minority in this poll.

[DeSalto]

5 inches for me too! DeSalto

[dr1819]

The results are now, statistically speaking, bimodally equivalent between 3" and 4". The geometric mean is now 3.48". Call it three and a half. We have a winner at 3.5" for a high heel!

[Guy N. Heels]

The results are now, statistically speaking, bimodally equivalent between 3" and 4".

The geometric mean is now 3.48". Call it three and a half.

We have a winner at 3.5" for a high heel!

Not so fast there. I scheduled the poll to run for 45 days. Not all the data is in yet.

[Guy N. Heels]

Well, so far the numbers are holding pretty close to the 3.5" mark (actually about 3.55", so I guess we'll have to add an extra lift to the shoes ) and this does take into account 2 votes for 5" heels. (I can only assume that those guys buy work boots with 4.5" heels as "ordinary boots". Still, if nobody wants to weigh-in before the poll closes, I'll reckon that the minimum height for a high heel is 3.5 inches.

[Guy N. Heels]

OKAY! The numbers are in and don't lie! After due consideration of all known factors and taking my zip code and dividing by my age the magic number is: (big drumroll and cymbals) 3.56 inches! So all you guys that consider 5" to be the minimum heel height for high heels - TOUGH LUCK! :x And I might add, I'm so glad the store owners in my neigborhood don't see it your way either. (Lottsa luck buying those "ordinary boots and shoes with those 4.5" heels. )

I am somewhat surprised that the voters did put the minimum heel height about 1/2 inch higher than what I personally voted for at 3", but - hey, that's what polls are all about! So now that we've got that piece of sticky business out of the way - IT's PARTY TIME! :drinking:

[RPMindy]

i am late to the party. here are my thoughts. 1- in the work place.. anything over 3 inch in general is considered a high heel.. in the law field.. anything over 2. 5inch is considered a high heel. most offices get a bit ansy when shoes clear the 3 inch limit (the more conservative.. the more ansy they get and the more it will affect your career). above 4 inch.. you're eithe in show biz.. modeling.. or in a relaxed atmospher to work with. 2- most folks who want to make a social impression about how they can do heels will go above 3 inch and consider that high. the skilled heelers will gravitate above 3 inch to make a point socially.. and the wannabees hover around that mark and get defensive if you say they're not high heels so.. yeah.. the survey is right. i've not run into anyone who'd argue with the cut off. i voted 4 inch.. because that cut off is undsiputable in almost all vending places i've been to.. most social circles i've traveled in... and most magazines i've looked at. if you can get to 4 inch.. you're considered a high heeler and need not go above that and beyond.. at 4.5 inch.. you're flirting with what most will consider kinky heights (not the heel fetish inclined folks though). true fetish height is now 5 inch (so i've been told) whereas before it was 6 inch. those are my thoughts. the vote shows it well. RPM p.s. just hope fashion doesn't change so much to do away with heels for a while.. don't care too much for the flat look or the kitten heel look.

[t-strap lover]

I voted 2" as a minimum hieght only because there are some really cute/sexy pumps that I love to wear all day. It evens out for me on the 3',4', and 5' heels since I wear those heels as much as the lower ones. I do like to buy at least 4" and above when possible but I will not turn down a sexy shoe of any hieght. I've had to go too many years starting in the early 60's having to settle for a size 10 womens that I could fit my size 10 mens in. back then there were no 11 or 12 to be had. Am I making any since out of this post? Hope so.

[Guy N. Heels]

AHhhhh, the post-poll pundits. Yet I am amazed at most of the comments that still seem to ignore the real purpose of the poll in the first place. So for those who never bothered to read it, I say again:

What would you consider would be the minimum height for a heel to truly be considered a High Heel? ...Please keep in mind that this is not necessarily the minimum heel height that you wear personally, and neither should it be the minimum height that you would like to see (on yourself, girlfriend, wife, boyfriend, etc.). The question is intended to establish the point at which a shoe ceases to be an "ordinary" shoe or boot and falls into the category that any manufacturer, advertiser, seller would call a High Heel.

Having restated the true purpose of the poll, I must say that I find many of the answers absurd. How anyone could consider a 5" heel as being a minimum height is quite beyond me! I know dancers who could not balance on such a skyscraper, and to expect a manufacturer to not make anything smaller defies all bounderies of financial responsibility. For that matter, even a 4 inch heel would be much too high to ask the average manufacturer to begin his production. The market would simply be too narrow to expect to make a profit.

On the other hand, there are shoes and various types of boots that have 2" heels and so it might be a bit much to start calling shoes with 2" heels High Heels. So common sense dictates that the minimum height would be somewhere between 2" and 4". But then I had to throw in the centimeters for those who don't wear heels in inches and who might not know an inch from a furlong. So almost immediately I was over the maximum of 10 choices allowed on the poll. And I must admit that even for the purposes of calculation I did not convert the centimeter's to inches. Rather, I rounded the figures to the nearest 1/4 inch and figured from there. Nevertheless, the poll was both interesting and fun.

[dr1819]

Since 4" is the highest that I can comfortably wear for any length of time, it makes no sense to me that 4" is the demarcation between a medium and a high heel, as I have no range in the upper tier. Also, to me, the transition between a low heel and a medium heel is when you feel like you're walking in a heel at all. I've a pair of 2-1/2 boots with no platform that just barely make me feel like the angle of my foot is different, so that's my cutoff between low and medium. For the transition between medium and high, I'd have to say it's at 3-1/2 inches, as anything between 2-1/2 inches and 3-1/2 inches feels like a heel, but it doesn't feel high. In fact, I very quickly forget that I'm wearing a heel at all. Above 3-1/2 inches, however, I don't forget because of the increased elevation, requirement for balance, the angle of my foot, etc. Besides, going back over the numbers of the poll, I did what's commonly done with statistical data - I threw out the highest and lowest responses. Since there were more responses in the 4.5 inch ranger than the lowest range, the mean is now much closer to 3.5 inches, and for expedience, we can simply call it 3.5 inches.

[Guy N. Heels]

...Besides, going back over the numbers of the poll, I did what's commonly done with statistical data - I threw out the highest and lowest responses. Since there were more responses in the 4.5 inch ranger than the lowest range, the mean is now much closer to 3.5 inches, and for expedience, we can simply call it 3.5 inches.

Right you are, Dr1819. Nevertheless, just to try and keep it honest I did include both the 2" votes as well as the 5" votes. Still, that 3.5" number seems to be holding pretty solid.

[asdf174]

5" for me.

[Thighboots2]

I voted for 7cm, being all metric converted - finally. but I feel that 3" in old fashioned units is where the transition from medium to high. Extra heel inches after that dont add much to your overall height untill you go into ballet heels and raise the ball of the foot. Seems to me that most women consider a 3" heel to be high and I guess for the normal uk6-7 size, it is. I am sure Dr Shoe could provide us with a scale for say a 3" heel at EU39 what does it translate to going up in steps of 1 to say EU46. That would be interesting. TB2

[Guy N. Heels]

5" for me.

Well, maybe you're all wearing heels 5" or higher in Kansas City (I guess it helps to get a little better look at the river), but the poll sez 3.5" constitutes a High Heel!

However, I did want to mention that when I set-up the poll I made no distinction between low, medium, and high heels. To my mind, the question was simply ordinary heels vs high heels. Today most shoe manufacturers would consider shoes with heels up to 2" as ordinary, and I certainly have no problem with that. So then the question becomes: "At what point does a shoe become a high heeled shoe; or, What is the minimum height for a high heel?"

So all you ultra high heeled lovers can join Asdf174 in Kansas City where their minimum is 5". (Did the Indians wear 'em that tall to get a better look around out there on the plains, or is that strictly the white man's notion?)

[stilettolover]

3.5 it is then.i'll buy that!

[shaq91]

well i voted 4, because thats when heels get a little harder to wear, but 3,3.5 are still high heels in my opinion, but they aren't hard to wear, therfore i vote 4.

[Guy N. Heels]

Ah, it warms my heart to still be getting feedback on this poll that was supposed to have closed a month ago. Do I know how to get 'em stirred-up or what?

Now the sooner we can get some lessons in basic English, the better off we'll all be. Fer instance, the word minimum has meanings like: least of; the smallest value; smallest amount; least; lowest; etc. So for anyone to say they voted for a minimum height for a heel while openly admiting that smaller heels also constituted high heels is, to my mind, a total perversion of the language. When I ask someone for the minimum amount of an item (such as cloth, which is sold by the yard, and the minimum most dealers will sell is a yard) I'm asking for the absolute smallest amount we can deal with. Why anyone would want to say any given height of a heel is the minimum height for a high heel and then admit that smaller heels are also high heels is, to my mind, a total contradiction of terms.

[Selene]

5 inch heels have always been my preference. I have never had any trouble walking in them. Almost came quite naturally and felt like i had been diong it for years the first time that I put them on. A short while back I bought a pair of 4 inch heels and they felt like I had flats on. Was really weird. Can't say that i have looked for anything lower then 5" since.

[Griez]

i like to wear 4" i got that high right now on(you can see in my avtar they) its a bit hard to walk, in last winter i tried 2 1/2" and it was nothing what cant be wear... this is harder but i'm training;) i sad that minimum is 3" cuz of this reason;)

[asdf174]

So all you ultra high heeled lovers can join Asdf174 in Kansas City where their minimum is 5". (Did the Indians wear 'em that tall to get a better look around out there on the plains, or is that strictly the white man's notion?)

Wow I think that’s about the most ignorant thing I've heard someone say of this site. I mean if I'm overreacting I'm sorry but you need to understand that a lot of people here would take offense to those kinds of stereotypical remarks. WE ARE NOT A BUNCH OF INDIANS OR COWBOYS OR REDNECKS OR HICKS JUST RUNNING AROUND! Kansas City is an urban city with lots of diversity. This is "NOT WHITE MANS LAND" We have white people, hispanics, asians, Itallians, Natvie Americans and If you can't tell by my pic I'M AFFRICAN AMERICAN! We have preps, goth people, geeks, jocks, skaters, metal heads, there is a strong hip hop scene here there is even a little bit of a rave scene here. (I'm a big electronic music fan.) Speaking of Music did you know that during the 30's and 40's. Kansas City, MO was considered to be one of the Big Jazz cities here in the United States? WWe even have two pro sports team NFL: Kansas City Cheifs (yeah they're here in Missouri not Kansas.) and MLB: Kasas City Royals (Though we don't like to take ownership of them as much. )Back in the day a real good Negro Team played here, The Kansas City Monarchs. Buck O'Neil was a local legend here. As is Sachel Page. Kansas City is just like any other city and has lots of Cultural Diveristy (lots of art openings, ethnic festivals/activities and and other stuff are always going on). So please be very careful with those kinds of statements. Especially the White Mans Land thing. I know a lot of people here that would be pissed if someone said that about KC. You've actually made me pretty upset with that statement. I mean I can’t stop thinking about it. It has been stuck in my head for about the last hour or so now. And as far as the whole "Plians" thing goes. I live in Kansas City, MO not Kansas City, KS. (Kansas City goes across two states Kansas and Missouri. But its all considered one big city. Kind of... Very few people no that.)

And another thing. Not everyone here wears 5" heels or heels for that matter. 5" heels is my thing. Those are the kinds of shoes that I prefer. Not saying that I wouldn't wear a 4" heel shoe or lower, as a matter of fact I have heels that low, some even 2" I'm just saying I prefer 5" or higher. And thats what I thought your last thread was refering too when you ask what is the minimal hieght that YOU consider to be a high heel. Hince my statement "5" FOR ME!!!!!" ME being the key word in that.

[dr1819]

Why anyone would want to say any given height of a heel is the minimum height for a high heel and then admit that smaller heels are also high heels is, to my mind, a total contradiction of terms.

Agreed, just as what one normally enjoys wearing in no way constitutes some sort of "minimum" so far as heel height is concerned.

I think the breakdown is fairly simple, even though an apparently slewed consensus shows 3.5" is the beginning of a "high heel." That consensus is that heels between 0" and 2" are low heels, heels between 2" and 3" are medium heels, and heels more than 3" are high heels.

A high heel is not the height above which you teeter or have difficulty walking.

I think it's time we revisit the word-based definitions rather than looking at numbers:

Flats: What it says - they're flats, with a heel no higher than the toe.

Low Heels: Can't tell the difference between these and flats. Even for a larger shoe size like mine, this falls into the range below two inches, as I can definately tell the difference between a two inch heel and flats.

Medium heels: I can tell the difference between these and flats, but have no difficulty walking in medium heels, nor do I need to make any adjustments for my gait. One can tell it's a heel but it comes as naturally as wearing flats.

High heels: High enough that one has to make adjustments to their gait.

The last is a little nebulous, but let me add this: If someone has been wearing high heels for a long time, they'll come to think of their modified high heel gate as normal, when it's actually not. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about measurable differences between a normal flat, low, and medium-heeled gait as compared to a high-heeled gait.

Everyone's different, not just in foot size, but also in their ability to adjust their gaits to different heel heights, which is what makes it so difficult to put a number on it:

1. The definition of a "high heel" depends on the size of a person's foot.

2. The definition also depends on how well they adjust their gait to the heel.

I recall a 1970's add where Cheryl Ladd walked effortlessly in a pair of 4-1/2 inch heels for a Charlie commercial (perfume). Still, her gait was slightly shorter than normal, so she was indeed wearing a pair of high heels.

Given these new considerations, I have to revise the definition, as it applies to me:

Flats: heel height - toebox height

Low heels: 0 to less than 2"

Mid heels: 2" to less than 3.5"

High heels: 3.5" or more

Can I wear 5" heels? Of course, although I'm more comfortable in 4" heels. Why kill myself or engage in stupid competitions to see who can wear the highest heel?

My point is that when I put on a 3.5" heel, I feel like I'm wearing high heels. When I wear a 4" heel, all the better. At 4.5", I have difficulty walking, so it's no longer fun, it's just stupid. At 5", walking is still possible, but it's become even more stupid, so I never go there.

My favorite pair of heels are 3-1/4". My favorite pair of high heeled boots are 4", and the heel height of my highest heels that I currently own are 4-1/2". I can wear the latter all day long without discomfort, but I usually don't, as they're stilleto sandals, and that's not the image I like to present outside, so I normally stick to my 3-1/4" or 4" boots, depending upon how I feel. In broad daylight, with large crowds, I have a pair of 2-1/2" block-heeled boots. By my definition, that's still a mid-heel, so I'm both happy, and anonymous.

Even so, during summer I occasionally wear a pair of women's toe-thongs with straps thick enough that no one gives them a second glance. They look just like guy's sandals, except for one thing - I can't find styles like these in the guy's section!

Sooner or later, designers will wake up and begin offering, en masse, heeled shoes for men. Not dainty heels in larger sizes, but heels that the vast majority of the male population would be proud to own, provided they weren't the only ones wearing a heel over 1/2"...

It'll take time. In the meantime, I'm headed for my local pub this afternoon, and I'm wearing a pair of 3-1/2" blade-heeled boots. I've worn them there before, so I'm not worried - should be a good time!

[RPMindy]

again.. well said. the classifications are pretty much what most folks will consider them to be. it's just heelers (meaning chronic heelers in mid and high heel area who 'shift' the heights upwards. RPM

[Guy N. Heels]

again.. well said. the classifications are pretty much what most folks will consider them to be. it's just heelers (meaning chronic heelers in mid and high heel area who 'shift' the heights upwards.

RPM

Okay, now I get it. In order to come up with an answer for this question, everyone takes license to change the word minimum to mean whatever they want it to mean. Also, there's no point in reading the original objective of the poll since that might actually confuse someone with some facts or, worse yet, endanger their preconceived notions. Fool that I am, who am I to expect an honest answer?