Psychology and Shoes - the darker reasons behind it

[stremph]

MY DARKER REASONS: The girl that babysat me when I was young was really into her shoes. She'd always show off her shoes to me, and she was so proud of them. Mostly, they were strappy sandals and the brown leather, lower and wedge-heel shoes that women wore in the late 70s/early 80s. She later moved to Arizona to live with us while she attended school. She had a lot of heels by then and I was really attracted to her, as I had been since I was very young. I guess I just associate certain shoes with beauty. My girlfriend knows this and shoes are a regular aspect of our healthy relationship. Also, I'm sorry if I'm a bit hard on the idea of men wearing heels. Most American women I know like having a solid line between manhood and womanhood. The majority (many of them open-minded, wonderful women) would probably freak out if their husbands wore heels, as it blurs the lines. Women I know like seeing men as strong providers, not as "elegant, glamorous" Swedish boys. Perhaps it really is a cultural thing. Foxfire mentioned that I had to be rational and fair or something along those lines when referring to clothing and gender. Well, I don't. And neither do you. No law can ever mandate double-standards out of existence.

[Francis]

To Stremph Firefox was referring to respecting people's opinions and to be courteous to them for what ever their fashion choice may be. If you feel that something is amiss, then say so. Don't hold back, all we ask is that you don't dwell on it in regards to postings on the forum. I sure that many people would prefer not to be drawn in to a long and protracted argument that will eventually just alienate people. That's not the idea of why we're here. Discussion is a great thing, let's not use it as a weapon. I find it interesting that you refer to Swedish boys with a feminine overtone because I know from experience that they most certainly are not feminine in any respect. They are proud to be men. I think you have been watching too many blue movies to base your assumption. I respect that you have a hard time with the concept that men wearing high heels is wrong. I will not have an argument with you on this point as I have many friends who can't accept it either. Indeed, if any other male walked past them wearing heels they would certainly vocalise their disdain, but because they know me for who I am they just say nothing on that score. Lots of people and places know me for who I am and not what I wear.

[Jeff]

On 2002-03-01 09:20, stremph wrote:

Are you really expecting to teeter into every job you'll ever have in women's shoes and NOT have problems keeping that job? And, is it your employer's fault for "oppressing" you? I think not. I can't eat another human being, even if I'm curious. There is no law where I live that explicity forbids consuming human flesh, it is just an accepted and valid norm.

I think in English this is called comparing apples with oranges, and I think this is rather softly put here. You come here ranting about men wearing heels in public and then go comparing this with cannibalism. Considering even the fact that this idea comes to your mind, I wonder who's the weirdo here....

Am I going to cry "oppression" because I cannot eat anything I choose? No. Quit your whining. Wear your heels in the privacy of your own house and thank the Brits, Russians, and Yanks that you can at least do that,

I will wear my heels where-ever I want. I walk around on this earth to live my life and please myself and not you or somebody else.

as I'm fairly certain Hitler would have killed men in heels as he did homosexuals. I know the difference between homosexuals and men who want to wear heels. But, most people don't. And most people don't want to. Live with it and be happy for what you have.

Not suggesting you do, but by making this point you make it seem you approve of the things Hitler stood for. Maybe next time better think twice about what and how you write things down here.

[Trolldeg]

Oh, get over it will you?

is that what you tell women who fight against opresseive social genders too?

Are you really expecting to teeter

I don't teeter. I wear my heels with grace.

into every job you'll ever have in women's shoes

I don't own any womens shoes. I own alot of shoes with high heels.

and NOT have problems keeping that job? And, is it your employer's fault for "oppressing" you?

Of course it is. it's against the law to discriminate against clothing.

I can't eat another human being, even if I'm curious. There is no law where I live that explicity forbids consuming human flesh, it is just an accepted and valid norm.

Are you for real? I recommend you to think over this argument again, and if you can't see the fault in it, please do not post things that do not make sense on these pages again.

*<font color=blue>I had to edit this post slightly because it was abusive to Stremph. Please everyone, we may not agree with each other, but let's be polite, and if we can't agree, then agree to disagree. FF </font>*

_________________

fashion is for cowards.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Firefox on 2002-03-02 03:03 ]</font>

[lion]

I don't post very often around here, but I must strongly agree with Trolldeg over here. I don't have any women's shoes, just shoes (or rather boots) with high heels. Let's start to quit calling high heeled shoes womens shoes. That's what this forum is all about.

[Firefox]

Quote Stremph: ....The majority (many of them open-minded, wonderful women) would probably freak out if their husbands wore heels.... Hmmmm.... I wonder if Stremph shares the same definition of open-mindedness as the rest of the world? Open-mindedness is accepting new concepts with exactly that attitude. "Freaking out" over something as trivial as footwear hardly falls within such parameters

[Laurieheels]

Wow, a charged social and somewhat philisophical debate. Certainly not what I intended for this thread, although I cannot say that I am upset. I am thrilled! Isn't it wonderful to have opinions and then be able to fight for them, to debate, and really share the ideas, even if we are all at odds sometimes?

[Ben(Canada)]

Hi all Thought I'd take a break from the digital photography newsgroup I got interested in and help you ponder this men wearing high heels issue. I remember seeing the video Dr Zhivago a while ago. Near the beginning of the movie I am sure one of the young men was wearing pretty high heel shoes? I know that a long time ago many men wore high heels, but when was the most recent time that they were considered fashionable? Other than say 2 inch heels, did higher one's just go out with a bang? Was it the war that did it, with men having to be tough and all? I wonder if there are fashion reference books and novels that talk about what kind of psychology and thinking was associated with this at the time? Ben

[Laurieheels]

Well Ben, I am not going to bother to reasrach it, just type it up based on what I think I remember. So this shouldn't take long. Ha! Men in heels a s an historical fashion trend came about through nobility. Tall was good. So if you wished to elevate your social status, you elevated your height! Men and women wore shoes with heels to have them seem taller, and thus better. It was a social convention for the rich. Of course, we are all thinking about French Renaissance and beyond, with the king and queen, and the nobles in fancy heeled shoes. The trend starts earlier, with women in Italian countries. Yes, countries, or states, they are all independant and feuding on some level. Maybe competing is a better word. Women wore a type of platform shoe, because this helped them appear taller and thus elevated their social standing, It was one platform, no heel or anything, and it was only to be taller than the other women. It seemed quite vicious from what we studied. Everyone was out to be better than the rest. Being a Floertine Courtesan was tough work! So we end up with height being equal to social status. So why did this go away? Well, face it, the majority of people were poor, lower class, and why be a foppish upper class twit? That makes you feared and hated. As we broach the Victorian period, men go back to the military ideal that was so prominent in the middle ages. Ever notice that Renaisance nobles and kings were quite fancy, and when we see Victorian pictures, nobility often dressed in army uniforms? Heels are quite impractical for war, after all. So during the 1800s we have a europe at war, and war in the Americas, and everywhere, really. The social status for men is now tough and rugged. It reverts to a more Medieval ideal, of man as warrior, defender, very manly. Go hunting and go to war and be strong again. So fashion swings in a new direction. These styles seem to flow into the 1900s and become stereotypes so rooted in our society that it is difficult to break. When we reach 1960, and we start to have a make love attitude in America, look what happens to the fashion trends? All through the 60s and 70s there are platforms and heels and very blurred fashion lines. People are being self expressive, competetive, and out to show off. This is a very renaissance ideal! And you can see how the American culture decided to look down upon the Vietnam war. Of course, what we have is only a section of society feeling the war is bad, and being very vocal. Rock and roll was always a bit expressive. And as we move through the 70s, we have two very different styles of music to contend with. Disco, and Punk. Punk is about individuality through tough looks. Disco is about flashy fashion for its own look. Disco died out and became ridiculed. Punk and metal moved and changed into the 80s. Men in heeled boots and wearing platforms were now associated with the disco era, and that was a time to be ridiculed. The 80s had Pop music, hair bad glam metal, and a lot of punk. I do believe music and fashion are connected, it is a social hinge. As we move into 1990, what is the big movement? Alternative, and the part of it that has the most fame is grunge. What is grunge about? Looking grungy, of course. Torn and dirty jeans, lumerback shirts, and still Doc Martens, beat up boots. A very plain androgynous style for men and women. This could not helpe create self expression. And other prominent music style of the last fifteen years are all about simple looks and conformity. Hip hop has baggy pants and ball caps, and the metal of the 90s was simple black T shirts and black jeans. This has run along a strange path, I know. It is late and I am throwing together ideas as I go. My overall point is to show how our society has shaped our ideals. I didn't even get into the movie industry and the Arnold and Sylvester style of action that made a manly look important. What society needs is to stop following trends. We need less Pop music and more of everything in music. We need movies that are different, not ten made from one general script. (Go see Lord of the Rings FOTR, a movie that shows that love between men is okay, and it is brotherly and right and all about loyalty, and does not have to be feared as homosexuality) So if we would like to change the world, we cannot do it by fighting the medium. We should be subversive and use the medium to motivate our goals. Once upon a time the King and Queen set fashion trends. Now, pop starts and actors and models make the difference. Who put them in charge? Our political leaders are now boring, and our jesters set the trend. So it is a reversal, is it not? If we return to a renaissance, if we create that mood of free thought and competetive expression, then we can cast aside the stale social conventions that make thin blonde women under 18 into stars and say that men must wear army boots and women clunky heeled sandals with a platform. It is all about perspective, is it not? Let's change it. Thanks for putting up with my rant, by the way.

[IHeels]

Think Lauries answered that one albeit with great verbosity. Simple answer, men last took to the streets in a big way in HH in the late sixties and early seventies. They may have been influenced by sub standard performers like Paul Gadd aka Gary Glitter. Their typical shoe was a clumpy platform with 3 inch heel, it was yuk. I think they could have done better by having the heel, but not the platform. (end, don't need to read further) Inga

[stremph]

"I think in English this is called comparing apples with oranges, and I think this is rather softly put here. You come here ranting about men wearing heels in public and then go comparing this with cannibalism. Considering even the fact that this idea comes to your mind, I wonder who's the weirdo here...."

Actually, they're both apples. Cannibalism is just a much bigger apple than men wearing heels. Both are socially unacceptable practices without any laws to actually state so. My point was that I object to the use of the term "oppression" when referring to the social attitudes toward men in women's shoes and clothing in public.

"I will wear my heels where-ever I want. I walk around on this earth to live my life and please myself and not you or somebody else."

Go you.

"Not suggesting you do, but by making this point you make it seem you approve of the things Hitler stood for. Maybe next time better think twice about what and how you write things down here."

Actually, the FULL quote stated that if WWII had ended differently, this might not even be an issue because I'm sure the Nazis (who I detest) wouldn't have taken to kindly to men wearing heels *in public* and would have instantly associated it with homosexuality, which we all know is a frequent misperception regarding cross-dressing.

[stremph]

Also, Francis, in his very reasonable post, mentioned that Swedish men are not effeminate as I implied I thought they were. The reference to "Elegant, glamorous Swedsih boys" was a reference to a post my Trolldeg, a Swede, who claimed that wearing heels made him feel elegant and glamorous. I was saying that it has been my experience with American women that they do not want someone like Trolldeg. Laurie's post touched on the social progress that has shaped this preference and the kind of men American women want. And, I disagree with Chief Wiggum. Most of America's problems are borne of the "if it feels good, do it" philosophy. There's a lot to be said for discretion and restraint.

[Laurieheels]

On 2002-03-03 12:44, stremph wrote:

And, I disagree with Chief Wiggum. Most of America's problems are borne of the "if it feels good, do it" philosophy. There's a lot to be said for discretion and restraint.

Okay, so it should read "It if feels good and does not hurt others, do it". Discretion is wonderful, but restraint is a tool of the control freaks to guilt people into not having fun. Let go and be free, have fun, and do as you will, provided no one ends up hurt. This is quite possible, you know. And if we use discretion when we overlook our restraint, we can have fun and no one will judge us for it!

woo hoo, fun!

[Ben(Canada)]

Hi Laurie I very much enjoyed reading what other's referred to as your very verbal piece on the history of style. I too get carried away with writing long pieces. Do you see movies? Have you seen "Finding Forrester". There is a part about telling the kid to sit down at the typewriter and type whatever comes to mind. This is a well-known way of getting rid of writer's block. I have done it myself. Well better to do your writing exercises for a purpose here in this forum, rather than type up something that no one gets to read. I actually read your essay the day after you wrote it about two weeks ago and thought about it a lot as I was backcountry skiing up in the mountains close to home. Here is the part that I liked the most... "If we return to a renaissance, if we create that mood of free thought and competitive expression, then we can cast aside the stale social conventions that make thin blonde women under 18 into stars and say that men must wear army boots and women clunky heeled sandals with a platform." I want to be a renaissance man. It really is hard though. The people that are alike share so much, the people that like to freely express themselves are all different from each other. They have little support. Why the other day I was working in a movie shoot. I thought the others must all be small time actors, maybe open minded. At some point we were all on a dinner break and in a lineup for some food. I did my howling crying act. You know, pretending I was terribly, terribly sad. Everything got quiet. I thought I was just exercising my acting muscles a bit, but I got some pretty big stares. I couldn't figure out why everyone didn't join me. Anyways I did get to have some fun later in the movie. It was pretty much a 12 hr lay on the bunk beds scene for most of us. I managed to think of such sad thoughts that I actually got myself to cry a lot every time the cameras came by. The gal next to me said I looked very sick and unhappy. I even got to lay in bed crying with the camera pointed right in my face. My point? Society suggests that it is great to do weird things in the sanctioned situations. It was not alright to cry at dinner, but it was considered great in the movie scene. It seems fine for people to drink and then do weird things. So my thoughts? If you crave to do something different, find a legitimate smokescreen or banner to do it under. Like to wear different clothes? Just wait for Halloween, or maybe get some friends together for a dress-up party. Just some thoughts. Ben

[Laurieheels]

Well, Ben, we cannot change society if we wait for the moments that can cover or excuse what we would love to do. Sure, it allows us out expression without the stares, but sometimes, we should just be ourselves, be whacky, and go live life. If it will not get us fired or thrown in jail, then why not do it? I had a friend in University that did weird things in stores. When buying something like juice or soda at a convenience store, and someone was near, he would see if they looked at him even a moment as they were moving about. He then looked at them and spouted gibberish, just to see the reaction. This can have one sent to the looney ward, yes. Basket weaving in Central Alberta is a common reaction. Still, he did not care, and just did things that never hurt anyone, but made him weird. Should it matter if no one else gets it? Just go be yourself and have fun. If you are smiling, and not arrested, and no one is hurt by it, then it's all well and good.

[Bob]

Sod that ben, if I want to wear what other people think of as weird i'll do it, smokescreen or no

[Laurieheels]

On 2002-03-15 05:09, Ben(Canada) wrote:

Have you seen "Finding Forrester". There is a part about telling the kid to sit down at the typewriter and type whatever comes to mind. This is a well-known way of getting rid of writer's block.

Well Ben, I just realized, you mentioned Writer's Block. I do not believe in such a thing. I believe in Writer's Detour, which is when a writer cannot keep going along the same subject at that point. A good writer can always write something, and is never blocked from writing. But any writer can hit a point where the ideas seem stuck for that particular moment, and a different path has to be taken.

My perspective is that I like to write about something different yet still related, or I like to edit.

Yes, edit. Read over everything already written. This will focus the mind on the subject again and then the detour is removed and instead of going backwards, the writer goes forwards.

Youca n call it writer's block if you like, I suppose it is close enough. I still feel that a good writer can always write something. This may lead to four or five stories or essays being worked on at once, but at least the creativity goes somewhere.

[Ben(Canada)]

Hi Laurie and others WRITERS BLOCK Regarding "Writers Block". Basically I agree with you. It is a condition where someone wants to keep writing the particular piece when they should be switching gears. But speed writing I believe is an exercise that helps unlock people's writing ability. Many people like myself try to write too perfectly in the first draft. Same goes for many other creative fields. It is sometimes good to just spit it all out no matter how it sounds or looks at first. BEING WEIRD IN SANCTIONED SITUATIONS It was not my intention to imply that one should only do self-expression in sanctioned situations. I was suggesting that it is an avenue to use. Also, there are ways to legitimize almost anything. For some people this is important. SELF EXPRESSION It might be great to live in a world where individuals could express themselves without fear of reprisal. We do live in a world however where most of society literally thrives on secrecy, deception, and filtration. I had a conversation with a friend where I mentioned that over 95% of what I tell people are carefully filtered thoughts. She thought that was crazy and claimed that almost nothing of what she said was ever filtered. Well, I think some people have crazier thoughts than others for sure. I don't consider myself very weird at all, but I find when I get tired and lose my ability to filter, all hell breaks loose. I am quite sure that if I expressed myself the way it was thought out in my mind that I would have no work, no friends, and no family. I would be forced out into the wilderness to fend for myself. WHAT ARE THE RESTRICTIVE ZONES I don't like deception, but I think filtration and secrecy are unfortunate but sometimes necessary aspects of life. For example if a coworker is feeling down, would you like it if they babbled all day long about how miserable they felt? Would you like it if your spouse rambled on for hours about how ugly you looked in a certain dress. Realistically that might be going through their minds. Here is a tricky one. If you own a law practice and yourself like to wear suits and nice shoes because you think that looks good, would you like it if those lawyers working under you would be allowed to come to work in torn jeans, barefoot, and tousled hair, and would talk to clients using phrases like "hey dude, how's it going." But what's really wrong with this? Sure, but what happens when people are allowed to do such diverse things that everyone is grating each other's nerves? Work and all types of relationships are especially testing zones of human expression. I had a gal friend who was married for about 6 years to a male before finding out he was gay. She went to all kinds of counselors to find out if there was something she could do to make her man responsive to her. Meanwhile he was having other relationships in secret. This kind of thing is common in our society, though it is not good in mind. But society is so used to this deception, that when people say the truth, or express what they really feel, or like to wear, it becomes a big shock to society. NO ANSWERS HERE In writing all this I don't mean to imply that I have found the answer to creative expression. I think some people are allowed more expression, some less. This depends on situations, and how offbeat the particular person is. It also doesn't help to choose friends that are also weird. I have had conversations with other very self-expressing people, who think that my ideas and behavior are totally unacceptable. Enough said, tell us what you think. Ben <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ben(Canada) on 2002-03-16 20:13 ]</font>

[Laurieheels]

Yes Ben, secrecy and filtration are a large part of our society. And when it comes to advertising for products, then the deception really shines. It's horrible, is it not? Sure, you are right, everyone has to use filtration and secrecy, and there are times when people must ascribe to a standard of socially acceptable behaviour. Some things need to wait until the funeral ends, people are mounring! My secrecy and filtration is not really based on what others might think if I shared, but more a sense of wishing to keep something of myself to myelf. I suppose the secrecy part, keeping something private, determines what the filtration might be. However, I dislike the filtration and there have been times I have ignored it and talked about things anyway. The result? No big deal, no real reaction, maybe even a bit of humour. It is all so delicate a balance, and that is what makes it so awful that society has to be this way. The trick, I think, is to understand the motivations and the needs, and then dance around them with the free will. The most difficult part of that trick, how to do it without effort. Sometimes we should empathize with others, and we must change how we are acting to fit their mood, but still be ourselves. This is where we need to be multi faceted as people, so we can still share of ourselves yet adapt to any situation. Maybe that is not as easy as it should be, so society is doomed I say, DOOOOOOOMED! I still prefer to be a strange and silly girl at work and express myself as I like, but maybe our secrecy and filtration are important for the tricky situations, when we can see someone's emotions and we need to tread lightly for fear of trouble. No one can be in a good mood all of the time, emotions do not allow for it. So you have it, about the aspects people need, and I admit, there are times when caution should be employed. I think this is coming to an understanding now!

[Jeff]

Certainly you have some interesting points there.. But I think there's more to it then just an addiction or habbit. Comparing it with smoking for example, I quit smoking six years ago and never touched a cigaret again, even though I get tempted lots of times. Now, could I do the same with heels? Just 'quit' buying and wearing them? I tell you no, my life would be misserable as hell. Whereas quiting smoking didn't have any negative impact on my life.

[Ben(Canada)]

Hi Laurie Thanks for your reply essay 2002Mar17 on deception, secrecy, and filtration. I love philosophy and your ideas formed the basis of several interesting conversations with friends. Ben

[Laurieheels]

Ben, did I get some credit in the conversations? I can hear you now "Yes, some weird girl online who likes high heels came up with these ideas we're discussing" To which a friend replies: "Ben, how much did you have to drink? How long have you had this fantasy world?"

[Firefox]

This is a very good thread that deserves revival. I hadn't read quite a bit of it which shows that this board is developing hidden corners after only a few months. There seems so to be a bit of discussion on what practices are socially harmful or inadmissable. One or two people are aluding the fact that because some people might not feel comfortable with men wearing heels, then this practice should cease in public. I'm afraid such a rigid interpretation of what is socially acceptable and what isn't is very much the thin end of the wedge with regard to degeneration of our society into a nazi state. What else are we going to ostracise? Crying babies in public, various religions, alternative cultures, bare cleavage, outrageous hairstyles. I'd argue we all have to develop a lot more tolerance and humility towards our fellow beings. History has shown us time and time again, that this is the only way for diverse cultures to live together in peace. I hope we are not going to make the same mistakes once more.

[Laurieheels]

Let's ban public restrooms, because some people cannot go with others around. So if you have to go, run home! Now, that is totally silly, but if we say don't wear this or show that, then we might as well ban the rest rooms, or make them individual rooms so no one has to share, and create total chaos.

[Laurieheels]

oooo, the wind up the skirt. The weather is getting nice again, and I am sure I will get the chance to enjoy that a few times this summer... it's just a nice feeling, it's not a sexual fetish type thing. It feels good, and on a hot day, that breeze is a welcome relief! And I am glad this topic still has some life to it...

[Samantha]

they make my legs look great, make me taller..feel sexy.....i love the feel of the summer breeze on my enclosed feet as i strut along....

[DandyDude]

For a time in the early 80s, men wore shoes and boots with heels and pointed toes. A lot of musicians, of course. The late Randy Rhoads wore a sort of hi-heeled jazz oxford, usually a solid colour with contrasting piping. Early Crue wore the pointed stiletto knee boots. It was a style. Nothing to do with gayness, and everything to do with attracting females. Of course you were called "fag", but with women hitting on you who really cared. I do think it's time to break completely from the idea of cross-dressing.

[azraelle]

On 2002-03-25 00:52, Jeff wrote:

...But I think there's more to it then just an addiction or habbit. Comparing it with smoking for example, I quit smoking six years ago and never touched a cigaret again, even though I get tempted lots of times.

Now, could I do the same with heels? Just 'quit' buying and wearing them? I tell you no, my life would be misserable as hell. Whereas quiting smoking didn't have any negative impact on my life.

My theory is this: There are some 1200 different endorphin molecules that are produced by the brain, acc to some obscure source (heck, it may only be 120); point is, each molecule causes a slightly different "joyful response". If for some reason your autonomic nervous system "learns" to make up a particular endorphin concoction that provides intense pleasure when you wear high heels, or crossdress, or even engage in BDSM activities, then you are "addicted" to this mixture, and the activity that causes it to be produced. All you have to do is think about it!

You don't have to march down to the corner store (or pusher) and buy some of it, like with cigarrettes, crack, booze, etc. Any ol' stray thought will do. Drugs, whatever the variety, are artificial and external MIMICS of actual, naturally secreted brain endorphins, which are, by definition, much more potent, and therefore addicting, than anything you have to get from an external source.

So--quit smoking? No big problem. Quit doing something that causes your central nervous system to pump out the OH SO FAMILIAR endorphin FIX? BIG PROBLEM!

[Nicole]

well i guess the short answer is "because i can" i think part of the reason for me was that it took a relatively long time for me to get a girlfriend. i was 19 at the time. in the meantime, i'd acquired an interest for women's clothes, perhaps in part so that i could pretend to be the girlfriend i so badly desired. by the way- my apologies to those who dislike it when skirts and high heels are referred to by me as women's shoes and clothes. However, i generally think of them like that and since my skirts, heels and dresses are generally bought from the ladies' department and designed for ladies' i don't think it inherently wrong to refer to them as such. back to my story however, since i started dating what was then my first girlfriend it's become a bit deeper. I have found that women's clothes are much more interesting, much more of a turn on, and just feel better on my body then 'nice' men's clothes. [for day to day wear in california, not much beats a nice heavy metal t-shirt, rugby or denim shorts and trainers] this is especially true for high heels. i like the way they look i like the way they make me look i enjoy walking in them to a certain extent i enjoy the inevitable attention, especially when there is admiration i enjoy the contrast between me, a fairly average sized man, and the feminine clothes and stilleto heels that i on occasion wear. No one who actually looks at me in the face is going to think i'm anything but a man. part of me likes the idea of being a woman, but on the whole i am happy being a 'boy in a dress' as it was so nicely put in "to wong foo, thanks for everything". there are things about it i don't enjoy. i don't particurally enjoy the fact that i have to be careful who i tell about it i don't enjoy the blisters that i sometimes get, usually because its too warm, and i am dressed too warmly. the same goes for chafing. i don't enjoy being laughed at, or called gay i don't enjoy the fact that it's an expensive habit. on the whole though, it's a lot of fun and when i come back after some time out, i am very proud that 'i did it'. this was especially the case when i wore heels [and much later a skirt] in public for the first time in broad daylight without any one holding my hand. Do those of you who wear heels most every day still have that feeling of pride?

[Bria]

Really I dont know why but they are a great turn on for me. Perhaps ist the feel of a stockinged foot sliding in and out of the smooth leather. Or watching a woman dip and dangle her shoe. I read once that the shoe has a dream meaning of the female genitalia... who knows. Do I enjoy it Yes... Brianne