New sex-segregated rules

[Tech]

Admin: I meant that as an example of how it is taken for granted that the Admin is the boss, whilst the mods are more or less the subordinates. That was all. On most message boards of whatever design, the admin is usually top dog, whilst the mods are the subordinates, not just the ones I mentioned.

Ah ha... Sorry dude, didnt figure you meant it like that....

I figured you meant it from the "Just an FYI to ya" perspective.

Dandy, I stand corrected and apologise if I read that the wrong way...

No hard feelings hopefully and yes, I now agree totally with your post...

Cheers mate:fine:

[MrsHeels]

OK So there are no top dogs here, they all play well together, and need each other...........So now can we??

Rules suck, but have to be obeyed....

Hey like my new avatar? I wrote all about it, in de-lurking wife...

And since I am not ranting or raving, I better geeeetttttttt.....

See ya,

Katherine

[chris100575]

I do like your new avatar Katherine, nice shoes and tattoos! I'm probably about a 10.5 US, so we could swap shoes if you like? Chris

[DandyDude]

Ah ha... Sorry dude, didnt figure you meant it like that....

I figured you meant it from the "Just an FYI to ya" perspective.

Dandy, I stand corrected and apologise if I read that the wrong way...

No hard feelings hopefully and yes, I now agree totally with your post...

Cheers mate:fine:

Apology accepted.

[MrsHeels]

I do like your new avatar Katherine, nice shoes and tattoos! I'm probably about a 10.5 US, so we could swap shoes if you like?

Chris

Hello Chris -

WOO HOO Swap, Swap, Swap, and Shop, Shop, Shop! Works for me!

Katherine

[Fog]

The goal of our administrative staff is to promote an open forum with respect to the wear of heels, but guard against this forum being overrun with either males or females, or other issues such as narcism, transvestic fetishism, etc....

I don't think there's much that you can do about the forum being over run by either males or females - not that there's much chance of the latter.

I am wondering where the other concerns come into the rules? I don't think it says anything about transvestic fetishism or narcism. Or is that just a personal view, which is fair enough. What I'd like to know is where is the dividing line between the personal view and moderatorial authority. And obviously I'm saying this knowing my post could be deleted if any one of the moderators thinks it's a breach of the rules.

[dr1819]

I don't think there's much that you can do about the forum being over run by either males or females - not that there's much chance of the latter.

I am wondering where the other concerns come into the rules? I don't think it says anything about transvestic fetishism or narcism. Or is that just a personal view, which is fair enough. What I'd like to know is where is the dividing line between the personal view and moderatorial authority. And obviously I'm saying this knowing my post could be deleted if any one of the moderators thinks it's a breach of the rules.

No breach at all, Fog - we do our best to encourage freedom of speech/expression, here, as it's rather fundamental to everyone's choice of fashion. However, since the board is open to minors to as young as 13, we have legal responsibilities to set and enforce rules which protect them from undue influences of a sexual nature. Discussions about transvestism aren't prohibited, as cross-dressing and other forms of transgenderism is considered common knowledge throughout modern society. Even the substitute teacher who shocked a local community by returning in the fall as a woman simply applied to work at a different school in the county, and no eyebrows were raised at all - she's substituting. Since the Internet is full of information on the subject, discussions about transvestic fetishism are also allowed, provided the content simply talks about the phenomenon itself, and doesn't cross the line into a report from any point of view (first, second, or third) of any actual or imagined event. That is not appropriate because of it's sexual nature.

Narcism was one of the topics discussed in my 10th grade psychology class, so I think we're safe there...

[Fog]

When my kids were thirteen, I certainly wouldn't have wanted them participating on a website that promoted male heel wearing. I've changed a lot since then, but I imagine that view would be shared by many parents of teenage boys.

[MrsHeels]

Hi Everyone -

I have 3 grandson's, oldest is 12, then 9 and 1.........They are all aware that thier grandfather wears heels. It was simply something they saw that was not a big deal with the family, and they grew used to the difference in his choice of footwear........

As for the oldest participating in this forum. I would have to be the one to chose which topic threads he reads and responds to, as some are way too much to explain to a 12 or 13 year old. But other then that, for the most part I believe this would help him to better understand the differences in people, and what truly defines people. IMHO

Katherine

[Fog]

That's no doubt true for you and most of the people who come here; but I'm sure that a lot of parents would be less than delighted if their sons were spending time here.

[DandyDude]

For the days when it was a style thing, and not a chapter in the psych's book of nonsense...

[dr1819]

For the days when it was a style thing, and not a chapter in the psych's book of nonsense...

Ain't that the truth!

I've done a good bit of lay counseling over the years, and having worked with several good friends who're either psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, or marriage and family therapists, we've all come to the conclusion that those who wrote the DSM-IV havent' the slightest clue as to how fashion has varied throughout the ages, or even throughout the world's present.

They should rip their noses out of the fashion world and stick to hard science, such as schizophrenia and other real disorders.

Some people skydive. Some people edit encyclopedias. I guarantee you both occur in far lesser proportions than men who wear skirts of heels, so, statistically speaking, skydivers and encyclopedia editors are more absnormal than crossdressers, and deserve their own special chapter in the DSM-IV!

Ernest Borgnine collected stamps - probably the only actor in the history of Hollywood who did. Does that mean he should be committed?

Seriously, I strongly suspect the folks that wrote the DSM-IV were being strongly pressured from certain mentally obsessive-compulsive conformists who want a perfect, uniform world - their uniform, and I also strongly suspect about half the folks who wrote the DSM-IV were themselves possessing of these obsessive-compulsive disorders.

As for the clinicians who refer to the DSM-IV like it's a holy bible of psychology, phooey! Their idiots, unable to think for themselves and realize 9 Billion people will never fit into a two-inch-think book.

[DandyDude]

From what I've seen, older threads prior to the moratorium date have indeed been grandfathered.

There may be a slip here and there, but that date was very well discussed and will be honored. I'll bring up possible slips on the moderator's forum.

Thank you.

I've noticed a few "slips" today.

Ain't that the truth!

I've done a good bit of lay counseling over the years, and having worked with several good friends who're either psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, or marriage and family therapists, we've all come to the conclusion that those who wrote the DSM-IV havent' the slightest clue as to how fashion has varied throughout the ages, or even throughout the world's present.

They should rip their noses out of the fashion world and stick to hard science, such as schizophrenia and other real disorders.

Some people skydive. Some people edit encyclopedias. I guarantee you both occur in far lesser proportions than men who wear skirts of heels, so, statistically speaking, skydivers and encyclopedia editors are more absnormal than crossdressers, and deserve their own special chapter in the DSM-IV!

Ernest Borgnine collected stamps - probably the only actor in the history of Hollywood who did. Does that mean he should be committed?

Seriously, I strongly suspect the folks that wrote the DSM-IV were being strongly pressured from certain mentally obsessive-compulsive conformists who want a perfect, uniform world - their uniform, and I also strongly suspect about half the folks who wrote the DSM-IV were themselves possessing of these obsessive-compulsive disorders.

As for the clinicians who refer to the DSM-IV like it's a holy bible of psychology, phooey! Their idiots, unable to think for themselves and realize 9 Billion people will never fit into a two-inch-think book.

I think a large part of the DSM was written to give the drug/dope pushers a larger profit!

[dr1819]

I think a large part of the DSM was written to give the drug/dope pushers a larger profit!

I wouldn't doubt there's some additional self-employing going on for all of those "health" care providers.

Sometimes the best medicine is simply having a pint or two with some good friends!

[Fog]

Yes it is great

Who cares what you feet does in 20 years? Whem my woman will wear for me 20 years a 4.5 to 5.5 inch heel every day, I will carry her around for the rest of her life

Rhonda, were are you :admin_welcome:

This post is taking this thread round a bit of a corner, I just want to comment on something I read on the girls' forum and this is probably the place. Yakumo doesn't care about his partner's health in twenty years. He says he will carry her around for the rest of his life. What would make any sane woman believe that? He thinks so little of her that to gratify his desire to see her wear high heels that he doesn't care if she does permanent damage to her body.

With comments like of this quality from guys posting on the girls' forum, no wonder there is resentment, and no wonder we're all tarred with the same brush.

[dr1819]

This post is taking this thread round a bit of a corner, I just want to comment on something I read on the girls' forum and this is probably the place. Yakumo doesn't care about his partner's health in twenty years. He says he will carry her around for the rest of his life. What would make any sane woman believe that? He thinks so little of her that to gratify his desire to see her wear high heels that he doesn't care if she does permanent damage to her body. How ridiculously sick is that? "Oh, honey, if you'll just wear 6 inch heels for the next ten years I'll carry you around for the next thirty."

Yeah, I wonder how long that'll last.

It's time those who're more rational on this board start calling these types of sick, twisted "promises" into question to protect others who may be visiting our board for answers.

People who truly love one another never asks the other to sacrifice so much. Instead, their primary goal is to minimize the sacrifices their spouses must make to make the marriage/family work.

[chris100575]

I missed that post Yakumo made but it is pretty twisted IMO. Much as I love to see women in heels, I wouldn't want my GF to wear them all the time, and certainly not that high. One thing going out in heels myself has taught me is that, having literally walked a mile in her shoes, this is a completely unreasonable thing to ask a woman to do. I never thought I'd say this, but if I had to make a choice between wearing heels every waking moment or never again, I think I'd opt for the latter. As for thirteen year olds reading the board, I don't have kids myself, but if I had a thirteen year old boy I'd rather he was reading this board than a lot of the other stuff that's floating around out there. Our focus seems to be definitely more on the fashion / social aspect of heels rather than the fetish side. Not that I'm saying that there's anything wrong with high heel fetishism (in the generally understood rather than psychology textbook sense) I have a bit of one myself, but our board is grounded in reality. Chris

[dr1819]

As for thirteen year olds reading the board, I don't have kids myself, but if I had a thirteen year old boy I'd rather he was reading this board than a lot of the other stuff that's floating around out there. ...our board is grounded in reality.

Chris

Thanks! It's taken some work, but I think it was well worth it. If the fetish stuff (the psychological kind) were here in any significant amounts, I'd never have registered in the first place.

One of the reasons I did register and began participating is because there were a lot of other decent women and men who simply shared a keen interest in heels.

One of the things I've enjoyed the most has been seeing pics of the members and their heels.

I was happy about the decision behind keeping men out of the women's forum. The women seem quite capable of keeping their posts out of the men's forum, but the converse wasn't true, which had caused the women's numbers to drop precipitously. The single additional rule was devised to reverse this trend, and it appears to be working quite well.

Meanwhile, most men are quite happy with the occasional female post in the men's section. I've not heard any complaints or seen the numbers of our male members die off in droves. If either occurs, we'll address it then.

Therefore, I hardly think the single additional rule can even remotely be termed a "New sex-segregated rules." A much more appropriate description would be, "New female respect rule."

Please note that "rule" is singular. And we're certainly not out to segregate the sexes here on this board! There are 24 forums available to all members, and only one is off-limits to men. That means that women can participate in 100% of all forums, and men can participate in 95.833% of all forums. We men are restricted from posting (including the mods and admin, by our own choice), in just 4.167% of all the other forums which are available to us.

Put simply, there's really very little reason to be upset!

Rules are a key ingredient for a properly functioning society. Without rules, no society can function. The only societies that have survived the annals of time developed good rules, and instilled well-balanced measures to ensure the rules carried some weight without being oppressive.

We have several other rules on this board, some more important than others, but all must be followed. They exist to protect the rights of every member in good standing from being beaten down by others who have few to none built-in rules in their social conditioning. The rules are fairly simple, in line with a modern, polite society, and serve to protect the majority from the few that would disrupt normal communication, personal growth, group enlightenment, and other socially desirable conditions, while minimizing socially undesirable conditions, such as bullying, disrespect, and conduct and content not appropriate for most thirteen-year-olds.

Bottom line: The additional rule has proven fruitful, and as such, it's probably here to stay. If you wish to discuss issues with the ladies, please see the For Everyone forum, or PM them. However, be advised that while we cannot monitor PMs, we CAN respond to complaints from those who receive PMs which break the rules! And given the clandestine nature of PMs, we tend to be quite a bit more harsh about questionably content in PMs than we do about content which is posted in a public place.

This is a good thing, as it helps to keep everyone here safe, happy, healthy, and more apt to dive into various discussions about everything from heels to housewives to househusbands to houses to how-to's to hotels to horse leather to hurts to happiness, to healing, and beyond.

And that's a very good thing!

[DandyDude]

This post is taking this thread round a bit of a corner, I just want to comment on something I read on the girls' forum and this is probably the place. Yakumo doesn't care about his partner's health in twenty years. He says he will carry her around for the rest of his life. What would make any sane woman believe that? He thinks so little of her that to gratify his desire to see her wear high heels that he doesn't care if she does permanent damage to her body.

With comments like of this quality from guys posting on the girls' forum, no wonder there is resentment, and no wonder we're all tarred with the same brush.

The post you are referring to is the sort of thing I was hoping to avoid when I first came to the original boards. I liked HHP because it appeared to be more of a social club as opposed to many, many boards on the net where the most vile things are posted. What I wear is a style to me, much like the mods with their 3" heel boots, drainpipe trews, and black eyeliner. I have no interest in reading, let alone participating in, discussions where people brag about mutilating themselves. There are other boards for that.

I'd gotten mad because the influx of certain types of posters have caused a change in the more casual atmosphere there was at one time. That seemed to drive off woman posters as well as to stultify what conversation there was left. I still don't like the fact that the few of us who posted occassionally in the women's forum to ask a question or to be in the discussion and still keeping in mind the purpose of the forum, were being punished because of the actions of the influx of those certain types of posters into that forum.

As I've said, I've abided by the new rules. I was never one of those who took over the forum anyway, merely an observer who would occassionally ask a question or three. Let the "resurrection" thread revert to its original topic, and direct any comments to Susan to her thread. Perhaps the common forum will grow in postings.

I'd much rather a 13yearold read these boards than a hiphop board or a board run by child-abuse advocating crazies. Keep the fetish things out, ghettoise the gender crowd as is being done, and perhaps a youngster reading this board will be able to learn something from it without being scarred for life.