Histiletto Posted June 22, 2008 Author Share Posted June 22, 2008 To the original question... Men would be saying "these shoes are killing me". Men would have a closet full of hundreds of shoes and saying "I don't have the right shoe for this outfit" (which often happens to me). Men would be dancing barefeet in weddings because feet were burning as hell. Men would be taking shoes off to enter the boarding room in airports. And so on. I like your examples. You can also add: Men wearing trainers to work, then changing to heels at their desks. I know all about that because I used to do it! I think that men couldn't be men as we currently know them to be because you simply can not do certain activities in high heels. I think this would lead to men having other non-heeled shoes, which begs the question as to what those might be. Would men be wearing ballarina shoes now? Possibly. The other thought I had would be whether women would have decided in the 1960s and 70s that they wanted to wear high heels too, because they want equal rights and they want to do whatever men are doing. If in fact man wearing high heels were the norm, then they would probably accept women wearing heels just as they did when women began wearing clothes that were typically male clothes. I think that men wouldn't do anything about women wearing heels. These portrayals of men wearing heels gives us more appreciation for the effort women have made and are making to wear heels. With both men and women in heels, there would be another area of commonality to be shared, instead of substantiating the socially created self-perpetuating theory of the gender gap. So, what if the man ends up carrying both pairs or they both decide to wear low heels, ballerina flats, or even go barefootin'. They will have been together and isn't that part of being a friend and/or companion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Histiletto Posted June 22, 2008 Author Share Posted June 22, 2008 Yes. In a perfect world, if I were to go out with a woman who was 5' 10" and I am 5' 9", and she was wearing 3" high heels, then it would be great to slip on a pair of 5" high heels to go out with her and she and no one else would have a problem with this. Again, that is in that "perfect world." For those who think that the heel height will make you as tall as the heels, well you haven't taken into account the placement of the ankle as the heel of the foot is raised. Depending on your foot size, you could still need at least another .5" to .75" in height to equal hers with the parameters roniheels has given. After approximately 2.5" to 3", the incremental raise in height of the body lessens dramatically per inch of heel height. Even the height of a 6" heel only raises the body less than half that height for the sizes between 9US to 11US WOMEN'S. If you have at least the .5" to .75" platforms with the 5" heels, then you would satisfy the difference in this particular equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyb Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 I think that men couldn't be men as we currently know them to be because you simply can not do certain activities in high heels. quote] Jamie I have to disagree men that would be the trade fields ie: carpinters mechaincs etc. Would still wear work shoes or boots I think alot of the footwear men wear today would have still evolved. The differance would have been in the buisness world and some in the retail buisness where men wear buisness cloths then instead of the slugs most men wear they would be wearing a nice pair of pumps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChipsHH Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 I hope to get a 2nd life, as a male, and males have the acceptance in high heels. Formally "HHDude" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts