All I ever had to do to decide not to wear high heels on any sort of regular basis was to look at my mother’s feet. Years of wearing high heels had given her bunions and pinched her toes so much that the nails had gotten squashed and thickened and started to resemble dog claws. Not only that, she could no longer comfortably wear flat shoes because her Achilles tendon had shortened over the years.
Plus, I’m tall enough. And the damn things make my feet hurt, no matter how expensive they are or how much padding is in them. Walking on your tiptoes is just unnatural.
That’s not to say that I never wear heels. Certainly I wore them a lot more in the days when I had to wear skirts to work; wearing heels was considered part of a “professional” look, and when you worked in a place that required women to wear skirt suits and men to wear their jackets whenever they left the office, you wore the heels. I just kept them in my desk and wore flats to get to and from the office. And then there are weddings and dances. Though I usually wind up kicking off the shoes to dance, unless I’m doing ballroom dancing. Then they’re actually helpful because you’re on your toes anyhow, and traveling backwards.
The WaPo had an article yesterday (via Feministing) about the kinds of damage shoes do to your body. It’s all there, in graphic detail, from the hammertoes and bunions to the increased forces the balls of your feet take with every inch of heel height. The article’s well worth a read, particularly for its observations about the origins of high heels — they’re meant to be non-functional, and were originally worn by both men and women of the upper classes as a sign that they didn’t have to do any useful work and had the luxury to be decorative.
Which really makes you think about the fact that typically, only women wear them today, even when they’re on their feet and trying to function. That they’re “required” by so many professional dress codes really tells you how deep the femininity=decorativeness equation is ingrained into our consciousnesses.
This little equation even seeped into the graphic used by the WaPo. Jessica cropped this bit:
Notice that the graphic is supposed to show what happens to one’s posture when one wears heels. Now, you’d think they’d take the same person in the same outfit and the same pose and just change the footwear. Nope, they used a photo of a woman in a pair of pants with covered arms for the flats graphic and felt the need to dress her in a strapless minidress for the heels graphic. Message? Heels are sexxxay.
Plus, they changed the pose. The woman is standing still while wearing flats and apparently walking out on stage to Riverdance while wearing heels (seriously, why else is she doing that with her arms? Though step dancers wear flats).
Now, the whole heels=teh sex thing does have some basis; after all, they force you to stand sway-backed, with your breasts and ass sticking out. But why reinforce the message that sexiness requires heels, in an article about how damaging they are?
I generally read that graphic as reinforcing that the idea that women are put in significant physical discomfort to fit a beauty standard. That doesn’t explain the difference in posture, etc. though.
High heels are required by many professional dress codes? I’m staggered by that statement. I wonder whether this is just cluelessness on my part, or whether it’s different in the UK and USA.
Couldn’t any such requirement be challenged legally on the basis that it imposes physical damage on women?
“But why reinforce the message that sexiness requires heels, in an article about how damaging they are?”
IBTP.
If that graphic had pictured the woman on the left in a business suit and heels, it would be a lot less annoying. I think Mikey may be right — I think there’s a little implication of, “Look at the silly wimmens and the damage they do for vanity!” there.
I haven’t worn high heels in over a year, but that’s because I tore a ligament in my knee last December and had surgery last April. I sorta miss them sometimes, especially now that I’ve figured out that I have narrow feet and can find shoes that don’t cause massive blisters within an hour.
Oh, and today’s shoes: black sneakers from Land’s End. I love working in entertainment sometimes.
Not to mention the scoliosis fetishists!
BTW, prepare for 184,582 personal is political anecdotes about heels. We’ve all seen it happen before.
That article was so annoying! They went into all the damage heels do, but then told us that flats can be just as bad. But they never said what shoes you CAN wear (aside from sneakers, which, as many have said, do not fly at fancy work places). I try and alternate heel sizes and if I have an event at night I don’t wear heels during the day, but my feet are very wide and almost all shoes are uncomfortable. Argh!
Today’s shoes: none. Sitting in a bra and underwear trying to finish my dissertation.
My whinging commitment to comfort frequently precludes any shoes but my Camper boots and a well-worn pair of g-series ballet flats. I do own, however, a lot of heels that I am very fond of — but will only wear them when I can be assured of going from home to cab to seat to cab to home. (In fact, I just bought [at like 80% off] a pair of candy apple red shot silk Prada peep-toe sling backs with a bow on the toe that I am DYING to wear. I’m sorry — I love them.)
IIRC, the “ideal” heel height is between 1/2″ and 1″. Completely flat shoes (like ballet flats) are bad because they don’t give you any arch support.
You may have to resort to buying shoes on the internet like I do but, believe me, once you do, you’ll never go back to buying in stores, because stuff will ACTUALLY FIT. You can search by width at most of the big shoe sites (like zappos.com etc). I almost always end up buying Naturalizers because they have a good selection in my size (7N) that don’t look like granny shoes.
I know that as a dude I have no business telling women what to wear–and I seriously believe that–and I agree with the general trend of not trying to police what people wear generally. I think it mostly is tiresome, wrong-headed and conterproductive. On the other hand, there’s no way I can pretend that purposely wearing shoes you know will be uncomfortable is anything but…well, not “crazy,” really, but very strange. I have so much trouble finding shoes that actually fit well and don’t cut into my feet when I walk for long periods (compounded by my tendency to suddenly go for long walks after months of being largely sedentary or to get lost and end up wandering around for hours, being chased by three-legged dogs), I can’t imagine anyone knowingly wearing shoes that aren’t even trying to be comfortable. Some women at the Feministing thread say they’re perfectly comfortable in heels, and even run in them (really?), but I still think the shoes are absurd. And the fact that they’re required as “professional” dress is even more ridiculous and clearer evidence of our society’s sexism/misogyny.
Generally I’m in favor of pointless masochism (“helps dull the pain”), and I don’t think (again, though, I realize that my perspective is pretty much worthless) there’s really a problem with women being concerned with their appearance (I think the “vanity” label pretty much captures the right attitude to that perfectly). But the pain-benefit ratio of heels is just so skewed, I can’t imagine any good reason for wearing them (and, by the way, the woman’s arms in that second picture are really weird. Like she’s walking on ice or something and trying tokeep her balance).
Oh I dunno, platform heels can be pretty powerful…
184,582 plus one!
/annoyance
ah yes, the Great Heels Debate. right up there with Bikini Waxes and Blowjobs on the feminist-tussle-o-meter! the feministing thread on the WaPo article is pushing 90 comments thus far…who knows where it will end… :)
Yeah, can’t we just talk about hijab instead! ;)
Why are you trying to take away my high heels, Zuzu?
I have been consciously trying to include orthopedic fitness as one criteria when loving various pairs of shoes, for a while now. So my list of shoes I love currently looks like:
– shiny black boots with 1″ heels
– platform shoes with 1-2″ rise
– army boots
– quality loafers
– cute old-school sneakers
– flipfloppy sandals with arch support
– and maybe only the best, coolest, most awesome heels, for special occasions
But I’m not really a heels kinda girl anyway.
God, I love my hiking sandals. Love them. I would marry them, but that would be bigamy, twice over. I even wore them for most of the winter (extra socks), except when there was actual snow on the sidewalks.
But why the hell is it so difficult to find winter boots that fit odd feet? It’s not as if I’m picky. I don’t look for arch support – after thirty-plus years of not having any it would feel weird to have my arch resting on anything; I just want a boot, wide width, wide toe box, laces. That is all.
I know the risks. I’m also “tall enough”. I know it’s stupid, from a doing-damage-to-your-body perspective.
But I love them, and I think they are sexxxy. Sometimes with certain outfits I don’t feel dressed up without them. I wear flats and sneaks, most of the time.
Sometimes I feel like I should get more het up about this, or that I should feel shamed, but I can’t and I don’t.
But I certainly agree that it’s beside the point to bring sexiness into a health article like this. I am tempted to email Brenna Maloney at the WP and ask her what the deal is, because I am curious. Was it a conscious or unconscious decision?
My boots have about an inch and a half heel. Does that count? Does it help that I like wearing boots with dresses?
Heels can indeed be sexy. It’s kind of fun to put heels on and suddenly be 6’3″. But I wouldn’t recommend that anyone actually try to walk in them.
And if you’re worried? Nobody’s going to take your heels away, cold dead fingers or otherwise.
Can’t we also do a bit of Wa-Po bashing for a moment? As with most of the statistically-based articles I have come across from them, this one just makes too many generalizations. What about those of us with high arches (4inchers or die for me, otherwise the soles of my feet feel like someone took a mallet to them, sorry)? Or as has been pointed out, narrow feet?
As far as I’m concerned, this article was less about “let’s help the women/I blame the patriarchy” (although I generally agree with both sentiments) and more about “look at this you silly, silly women – don’t you realize that you’re injuring yourselves by adhering to precisely the standard that we at Wa Po generally set for women (what with articles about the poor fashion taste of female politicians, for example)”.
The feminist issue with the article should perhaps focus on the ways in which this is yet another example of why feminists just can’t win.
Maybe I just like to look on the bright side too much, but maybe the change in clothing and posture was designed to reflect the change in shoes to look more fasionable or something. What I got was that a woman’s style must match throughout in clothes and posture.
But guh, I hate heels. They’re painful and I like being short anyway.
I’m rather fond of my chunky 2″ boots and my myriad pairs of 2″ clogs, but I’ve never worn spiked heels. I actually blame too many horror movies from the 70s and 80s, in which women who wear heels trip, fall, and are devoured by the monster. My rule: can I throw a kick in this? Can I run? If the answer is no, then I don’t get the shoes. (I can’t run in the clogs, either, but I can kick them off at Hypothetical Monster and sprint).
Besides, in SoCal…I’m in flip-flops most of the time anyway, or barefoot.
Jill, Ikea sells some really nice small shelves that you can stain or paint. Put the heels on them and dust them once a month. They last longer that way and so do your feet.
If only we could do the same thing with bikini waxes and blowjobs.
It is possible to wear high heels without standing in sway back. It’s even possible to walk in high heels without wiggling your ass. I grant that you do have to overcome a lot of training to do so.
Yes, H Jeff, you can run in high heels. Sprinting, like ballroom dance, is done on the toes.
Talking about high heels (blow jobs, bikini waxes) does not have to mean forbidding people from wearing them or shaming people who do wear them. It is perfectly legitimate to examine the role of feminine trappings from a feminist viewpoint, and the conclusion for some will be that they are damaging. I conclude that feminine trappings are damaging, but I can’t even police my own behavior, much less anyone else’s.
There’s a web site that I use all the time for comfortable ergonomic footwear called: Most Comfortable Shoes.com
Most Comfortable Shoes
To me, heels are a class thing, especially here in San Francisco. Wearing heels either means you have a car or you can afford cab fare, so you don’t have to walk as much. But if you walk, or stand on the bus for a long time, heels aren’t just impractical, they’re basically impossible. Maybe this is just me, but I don’t notice a whole lot of people wearing particularly high heels while walking the half mile or so between bus stops.
Also, you can always wear men’s dress shoes when you’re wearing pants. If you’re wearing a skirt, you can obviously wear shoes that are flat. The whole, “but you have to wear heels to be professional” argument is just crazytalk.
I had to revamp my shoe collection when I fractured my hip. (Don’t ask how you fracture a hip at 26.) Anywho, I’m short, so I’ve always loved wearing heels, and my wonderful sports medicine doctor recommended Thierry Rabotin shoes as good all purpose work/dress shoes. I love the pair I’ve been able to afford!
These are currently on my lust list. Of course they would have to be far too expensive.
. Maybe this is just me, but I don’t notice a whole lot of people wearing particularly high heels while walking the half mile or so between bus stops.
A lot of people wear casual shoes for their commute/walk to work, and then change into their ‘work’ shoes when they arrive at the office. It makes sense for women who wear high heels, but I see quite a few men do this as well, so I guess their shoes aren’t always perfectly comfortable either. And it saves your ‘good’ shoes from getting too scuffed up and worn! Maybe this isn’t a practical option for everyone, but it can be a good idea.
I’m going to be completely irrelevant now.
If this means Irish step dancing, well then it’s not exactly true. Irish dancing hard shoes have about 1″ heel, although it is a wide heel. And you’re actually supposed to stand on your toes as much as possible even in the hard shoes.
Well tell that to an Irish dancer, who walks, runs and jumps on her/his tiptoes all the time. Though I suppose it’s different when you’re actually supporting your own weight with your feet and legs, and not resting it on a narrow heel.
The point to this? There isn’t one, really, apart from dancing being one of my favourite topics. Personally, I find heels very comfortable, especially if it’s a wide heel of about one inch. And I also find, that having danced (on my tiptoes) for a few years, I’ve developed quite impressive muscles in my feet, and am now comfortable even in narrow heels.
Having said that though, the majority of heels available ARE uncomfortable and badly made.
I’ll go and shut up now.
edith, I was way into heels in high school (while I was also way into ballroom dance) but once I came to college and was carless (not careless, but I guess that’s true too) for four years, I lost all ability to be comfortable in heels. I’m not sure how much I miss it, though.
Loathe the picture. They could have done much better than that and still gotten the point across. And I do wish the article would have offered information on what kinds of shoes are better. Pretty incomplete job there.
But I do love heels for special occasions. I’m so glad that I work at home and don’t have to wear any shoes much of the day if I don’t feel like it. But the occasional pair of heels is just so much fun and does look nice.
And yes, I am one of those who can run in heels if necessary. Sprinting, as Frumious B says.
I have enough trouble balancing in my bare feet. Heels? I’d only wear ‘em if I felt like having an intimate encounter with the floor.
Fortunately, I work in a library, where comfortable shoes rule.
I have no problem with businesses having dress codes, until those dress codes have pain or body alterations as a requirement. And high heels fall into that latter category, IMO. Yes, you can get used to them (well, some of us can), but you shouldn’t have to.
Depends on the formality of your office. I’ve worked in banks for the last 3 years, but have been fortunate enough to work in the casual departments where you can wear flats, twill pants, and a comfortable shirt. I believe that positions of more seniority like vice presidents, or those that involve meeting the public, like sales, have more formal dress codes. I’m not aware that any *require* heels, as there are dress flats as well, but I guess sometimes the heels go better with the formal office wear?
Personally I never wear heels, even to weddings–I prefer the dress flats or very low heels–but at the same time I tend to feel “out of fashion” by doing so. I have some sort of issue with my feet that makes extremely painful for even an hour to wear shoes that are hard or have too much heel (flat arches I think). I’ll tolerate shoes with some heel for formal occasions, but the last time I wore a high heel was in 1994. Just personal preference, and foot issues I guess. But I always feel that those in heels look better, at bars/clubs or weddings, etc., than I do in my flats. Beauty standard?
I do see a lot of women around NYC wearing heels that are so high that they look uncomfortable walking–they walk considerably slower and sometimes look like it’s hard to get up and down the steps. Maybe they are required to do so at work, or are wearing them because they like the look–I don’t know.
Jeff- As a woman, I don’t even understand how other women wear uncomfortable shoes.
But I have poor arches, so most shoes are uncomfortable for me and require an insert. I wear sneakers almost every day if I can, and in the summer I wear my Birkis.
I mean, I’m all good with everyone choosing whatever they want to wear, so long as it isn’t just because they think they’re supposed to wear it. (And a company making you is just ridiculous!
I must bring up one of my co-workers here, who wears a skirt and heels to work every single day, even when she’s doing physical work like carting around and unpacking crates full of art. When she went to Montreal to open an art show, she was swanning around the city in -30 weather in heels. She went to Disneyland — and rode the rides — in her heels.
I blame the fact that she’s Canadian. They must all be weird up there. ;-)
I’m a guy. I like to watch women walk. I think that is ok, even here. But the exageration of ass-wag of a girl in heels is sometimes so noticeable…and not really appealing. It was like a mild deformity or some kind of feigned helplessness. It was also not athletic, i.e it is a fashion that projects “I am never fast or agile”.
And this is so old in a way, I am surprised the fashion ever came back. The first in-your-face feminist I ever got to know called them “come fuck me heels”. This is 26 years ago. And before that, even farm boy me knew the literature had findings of bone, posture and nerve damage from long term use of high heels.
So I am reading your post kind of like its a PSA but I am also wondering: why don’t people learn anything?
With my office, the skirt thing, as well as the heel thing, was unofficial but communicated through channels. Once the female associates realized that they outnumbered the male associates — and that they weren’t going to fire us en masse, especially when one of the two female partners acted in solidarity and announced she’d just bought some pantsuits — we wore pants, and flatter shoes.
But then, we still wore skirts and heels to court, because, well, it seemed to be expected there.
With some exceptions, of course (cocktail waitressing, for one), heels as a requirement of professional dress is never really stated outright. But if the office environment is right, someone will be sure to let you know what’s expected.
The “have to wear heels to be professional” is often enforced in a roundabout manner.
At one job I had, a particular manager started saying that my shoes – lace up black leather shoes – were actually sneakers, and therefore violating the dress code. I told him that these were shoes, not sneakers, and one of the few styles that I could find that fit.
He then said, that if I needed these shoes for medical reasons, I should get a note from my doctor. Of course, I don’t need these shoes because I have a medical problem, I need them because I refuse to wear shoes that are going to give me problems. Not a medical issue, but a marketing issue from the shoe companies.
Happily, my immediate supervisor used to sell women’s shoes, and intervened on my behalf. Had the company VP of human resources come down and officially look at my feet and say that these were shoes, not sneakers, and therefore within the dress code.
Aside from the first conversation with the confused manager, everything else happened without my knowledge. My immediate supervisor contacted the VP and arranged everything, and then filled me in later. Which I appreciated, it saved me a lot of stress. And I was able to introduce a few other women who worked there to the concept of sane shoes – one woman in her late 50s who had worked in dress shoes all her life was literally shocked to put on a pair of ordinary lace up shoes with good soles and not have her feet hurt.
But people enforce this unwritten rule that “women must wear heels” in strange ways. Such as defining any reasonable shoe as a “sneaker” and not professional.
I’ve been way too influenced by Japanese musicians, I love great big platform shoes with a little heel in them. but that’s basically for days out with my girlfriends when we dress up.
The sharking heels made me think of This anime
The blue one actually has explosives in the front of her foot there
Kick!
“With some exceptions, of course (cocktail waitressing, for one), heels as a requirement of professional dress is never really stated outright. But if the office environment is right, someone will be sure to let you know what’s expected.”
I’m not sure about that- I seem to recall that it’s perfectly legal in the USA to require your female staff to wear make-up, etc
(From workplacefairness.org, deep within many frames and clicks: “4. My boss requires me to wear makeup, and seems to have a much more different dress code for women than for men, is this legal? While it is not legal to have dress codes only for one sex, but not the other, so far, the law seems to allow different dress codes for women and men, as long as they do not put an unfair burden on one gender more than the other.
Recently, Harrah’s Casino implemented a dress code requiring women to wear extensive make-up, stockings, and nail polish, and required them to curl or style their hair every day. Men, however, only had to maintain trimmed hair and nails. A 20-year female employee did not want to wear makeup because it made her feel like a sex object, and she was subsequently fired by Harrah’s for not complying with the dress code. While this dress code seemed to discriminate against women and impose a greater burden on them, the court held that it was legal to fire the employee because she could not prove that Harrah’s requirements were more burdensome for women. However, employees who can prove that the dress code is an unequal burden between male and female employees may be able to successfully bring a sex discrimination claim”)
So it doesn’t seem all that unlikely to me that there would be high-heels-on-the-women requirements at many, many workplaces. This info is for USA, and I’m based in Australia, but I seem to recall a similar case here being brought by female bank employees that upheld the right of the bank to impose gender-role conformity in the workplace. The whole thing makes me incredibly glad that I work in the scruffy lefty community law sector, where not only can I wear flat boots to work, I can swan around with “SupaVulva REVOLT RIOT REBEL” patches on my jacket without anyone lifting an eyebrow.
Well, Harrah’s is a casino, and IIRC, the woman in question was a bartender rather than a cocktail waitress, which is one reason she was all WTF? about the makeup rule. Restaurants and bars really seem to enforce the gender-compliant standards, especially for servers. I remember going to Foxwoods Casino in Connecticut, and really feeling for the cocktail waitresses, who had to wear skimpy little faux-Indian outfits and strappy heels. For who knows how many hours a shift.
Have they looked at the price of makeup?
Requiring an entire class of expense for women as a condition of employment that you don’t expect from men strikes me as “more burdensome” by even the most ruthless capitalist definition.
Yep. I love my heels in an unnatural fashion (it’s hard work being a female shoe fetishist) but I flatly refuse to wear them walking down the street. They sit in my bag, which is nice and dirt free, until I get to wherever I’m going, then they slide onto my feet for the duration of my stay. Once I leave, it’s back to the emergency shoes.
I’m well aware of the health problems heels can cause, and I make various compromises. I try not to wear them for more than a couple of hours, and any extended stay in heels has on either side of it a couple of days in flats or barefoot only. I wear no shoes as often as possible, I buy good quality well balanced shoes, and I always wear gel inserts. I also favour shoes with a slight platform, and never wear anything too tight.
Those restrictions in place, I’m happy to risk pain for my vice. It might be stupid, but every single human I’ve ever met has SOME sort of vice or habit that isn’t entirely good for them.
Maybe ‘ high heels required’ is a particularly US thing, tied to the availability of motorised transport. Here in Amsterdam you see heels in the shops but rarely on womens’ feet. It’s possible, but very hard to ride a bike in high heels.
I walk a lot as I live in a big city and don’t own a car, so heels are right out for everyday wear. Besides, if you look around, you can find awesomely cute and professional shoes put out by the “comfort” brands. Naot, Beautifeel and Camper are my favourites.
Heels are, however, fantastic for looking nice in situations where standing or walking isn’t required much – which was their whole point in the first place. I’ll happily don my 4-inch red killer peeptoes for those sorts of events, and carry sandals in my bag.
Also, oudemia, where the hell did you manage to get those Prada slingbacks?!
I don’t tend to wear heels except for really, really special (and therefore rare) occasions. This has something to do with me hating skirts and almost always wearing pants, and a lot to do with having really messed up feet so that even some sneakers are painful. Also, I seem to have the opposite attitude of some tall heel-haters: I’m short enough that even with 4″ heels, I’d only barely be average height – so why bother?
I remember joining mock trial during my freshman year in college and being utterly flabbergasted that skirts and heels were “unofficially” required. I’d even heard of some women not being allowed to compete in a particular round and being sent out of the room, simply because the male judge didn’t like that she was wearing pants. Insane.
It’s rather an odd pose the girl in high heels (diagram) is in anyway. I rarely wear heels (special occasion…twice a year? If that? For a coupla hours?) and there is no way I stand like that. Watching the other women around me wearing high heels, yes your gait changes to a bit more of a strut, but that bent knee, awkward pose? No way. Anyone else think the pose is off?
Another question – since people these days are largely sedentary, the most walking many high-heel wearers are to and from the train. For many people it’s not a big chunk of time walking in the shoes, which may go some way to explaining their ubiquitousness. They don’t wear them long enough to get bothered by them.
(Obvious disclaimer – wearing them all day, walking, standing, carrying bags, etc etc is a bad thing, blah blah. This theory popped into my brain when I looked at office worker’s feet as compared with a sales assistant’s. Office – higher incidence of heels, assistant – higher incidence of flats.)
Kristen Says:
I had to revamp my shoe collection when I fractured my hip. (Don’t ask how you fracture a hip at 26.)
Not to be totally off topic, but one of the weirdest things we saw at USMC boot camp graduation were all the groups (forget the proper military term) of female recruits. They were invariably led in their marches all around Parris Island by a half dozen or so women on crutches. Apparently, a very scarily high percentage of female recruits break their hips going through boot camp (or so my brother explained). And their average age had to have been under 20. Damn.
Back on topic, I am sooooo glad that I’m in a field (chemistry) where I get to wear dress Doc Martens and other super-comfy shoes. Safety trumps dressiness in manufacturing, even if I don’t spend more than an hour a day in the lab. I’ve even had to discipline women for wearing flimsy little open toed shoes despite verbal warnings. The worst offender was the kind to complain loudly and frequently about how much her feet hurt, while insisting on wearing the damn things in all parts of the plant where they weren’t forbidden. WTF is up with those people? I can accept that some women are more comfortable in them, for whatever reason, but the ones who insist on complaining about them while also insisting on wearing them when they’re actually discouraged drive me nuts like nothing else.
Wow! That’s awful. Makes sense though. The pelvic bone isn’t as strong as we think it is (for one thing is got a bunch of joints in it!). And if women have to run with men, given our shorter strides, we’re probably more likely to get injured. I got my stress fracture from kickboxing, but I recall the doc mentioning something about how the strength of the male muscle makes it easier for them to do those high side roundhouses while protecting the pelvis. Plus he made me spend hours in physical therapy learning to use a smaller stride so that I wouldn’t put more stress on the area.
Spike heels in winter are surprisingly useful, especially when going up or downhill. They’re like little climbing axes on your feet. You don’t want them to be too high, though.
I used to think I didn’t give a damn about my shoes. I had heels for when I dressed up, but you don’t do farm work in a dress heel.
And then I dislocated and did other nasty things to the midfoot of one foot. Flats for the rest of my life.
I wore heels, and I mean just one or two inch pumps, maybe once every couple months at that. And I had a black pair, a navy blue pair, and a brown pair…highly boring, match what you need to. No “fun shoes”. Nothing to get attached to, you know?
That’s what I thought. It took me a year after the accident to bag them up, and I cried like a river doing it, and the bag had to sit there another six months on the floor of my closet before I could give them to my mother (who wears the same size I do.) It really illustrated to me how VERY deep the societal association on sexy shoes goes.
zuzu, you might be interested to know that here in Adelaide, until only a couple of years ago (might be three, but it was definitely changed whilst I was still in school) the dress code for female practitioners appearing in the Supreme Court was still skirted suits only. You’d have to seek leave to appear if you were wearing a trouser suit. Unbelievable.
We do a lot of walking in my particular area of practice, since our ‘court’ is 15-20 minutes each way and we don’t get to call taxis, so most of us wear pointy dress flats or very low heels. The other practitioners, though, who stay in the office more often, definitely wear heels all the time. In a recent ‘promotional video’ which showed a lot of young smart lawyers walking the corridors, our section was the only one from which no-one was filmed. We figured it was our lack of heels. Bad for the firm’s image, dontcha know.
I just figured heels-girl’s arms were straight because they wanted a straight line to over-emphasize the curvature of the spine, and to make the heels-wearing posture look as tortured and uncomfortable as possible.
Like how in weight-loss commercials, the before picture is always arms-down, body straight-on and face frowning, leaving the person looking sullen, lifeless, and dumpy; the after picture is usually a 3/4 shot with a twisted midriff to emphasize the shape of hips or face turned to one side to highlight the line of the neck and contrast with an earlier double-chin, while the arms are usually up in a more-active pose unless they’re holding up the now-comically-oversized pants from the Before picture, and the person’s always smiling.