Shoe fashions and practicality

[Sarongman]

There have been a few posts recently criticising peoples shoe choices albeit, in a friendly manner. I am throwing in my opinion as to shoes for men to wear with skirts. With an ankle length denim, or heavy twill, I think anything clean and comfortable is the go. Those of us who wear shorter skirts with tights may need to look to something neater and dressier than trainers or riding boots. Heels, well, I don't particularly approve for reasons of practicality, however, that is my personal choice not to go that way.

One worry I have with some fashion shoes for women is that they are, in some cases, very bad for the wearers feet. My S.O. used to work in a Posh hotel, (and had served the Duke of Edinburgh) which establishment forced the women staff to wear a shoe which eventually damaged her feet to such a degree that her toes were crossed , bleeding and deteriorating to the point that she was forced to resign. She still needs to see a chiropodist on a regular basis. Needless to say, we are both enthusiastic supporters of comfortable, practical shoes.

Okay, let the ruckus begin!

[Departed Member]

My only real criticism is that this topic belongs in "Other Stuff", not "Introductions"!

It used to be 'fashionable' to smoke - thankfully that's coming to an end. Same with 'high heels' - they came into vogue to make short folk taller, nothing more, nothing less. Ask any chiropodist what they think about them! (Mind you, it does keep them employed in great numbers! )

Whilst there may be a point that a moderately-built lady may actually physically benefit from wearing a 'reasonable' height of heel, with a bloke's physique, it's a completely different matter. I've yet to see a bloke in high heels that looks 'right', probably why they'll end up in the 'Spinal Injuries Dept' at some time in the future(?).

From Joe Public's 'skirt acceptance' point of view, the addition of high heels on a bloke only serves to support their (sorry, should that be Media's?) belief that it's just a step to full blown transvestism. We (here) may well know that's not the case, of course, but that doesn't stop the Media perception, and subsequent derision. That one bloke in high heels at MSM got more attention/photo coverage than the rest put together, and probably inadvertantly did far more harm to 'the cause' by wearing 'em.

[SkirtedViking]

Unfortunately there is a lot of bias against men's fashion freedom. I do approve both bravehearts and freestylers (being one of the latter). My opinion is that if a man is to be a freestyler in order not to be mistaken for a transvestite has to be (because of the narrowminded people) rather masculine in body, or grow a beard - androgynous look is not helping the cause. Significant others also help a lot to brake the gay stereotype for men in skirts. Go out with your girlfriends, wives etc. As the case with women's freedom it became gradually - first the trousers and then all other men's apparel and shoes. And most important FF does not mean that one has to be bravehart, freestyler or in between. Just be yourself and be accepted as a regular male, that is what we strive for, isn't it?

[sapphire]

I support men's fashion freedom and can deal with most fashion choic es. I have enjoyed many of the looks that have been posted here. I would like to think that I'm pretty open minded.

However, I do have a strong bias against high heels, for women as well as for men. This is not a fashion bias. It is a health bias. High heels and pointy toes will deform feet over time and may lead to pain and deformity that can not be reversed. Surgical correction of the deformities may lead to even more pain due to the nerve damage that can not be avoided during surgery.

I know. I'm a victim. I wore high heels as part of my business costume for many years. I looked good in them.

I have huge bunions that look like arrows sticking out on the inside edges of my feet. The tips of my great toes align nicely with the center line of my feet and and ankles. I have bunionettes on the outside edges of my feet. The rest of my toes are permanently turned under like claws and one toe on each foot has a joint that sticks up and rubs against the top of the toes box if I wear regular shoes. Mt feet are flat and my ankles are pronated.

I have to find shoes with a deep enough toe box to accomodate the height of the hammer toes. I have to wear wide shoes (even through my feet are narrow, because my toes are shifted to the outside. I need to wear orthotics and ankle braces.

Over time, the misalignment of my feet and ankles has caused injury to my knees and hips. I'm facing having to wear knee braces as well.This goes beyind a fashion statement. It is deliberate disfigurment of your body.

If you are tempted to wear high hells and pointy toes please reconsider.

[SkirtedViking]

Well if a man wants to wear heels he should be able to do so, as a woman can wear the most ugly looking men's shoes on the planet if she wants to. I do wear heels and got no problems with it.

[Ray]

SkV, that's because you probably dont wear them half as much as Sapphire did.

Sapphire, you make good points on the health issues. I wonder, though, if heels could be worn in moderation by men. I do admit though that big lads dont really suit spindly heels, and this is not a sex/gender/whotsit thing. Big women don't really suit spindly heels either. It's like putting spacesaver tyres on an SUV.

Of course, you can get a comfortable shoe with space AND a heel. I have 3 inch heeled boots that fit that description. The heel is quite broad and stable, while the toebox (is that the correct term?) is broad and, dare I say it, not really that feminine at all. They suit me. They would not suit a waif of a person.

[sapphire]

Hi Ray,
What you say is true. In moderation, the shoes are less of a threat. In my case I wore them every day to work and church on Sundays. For 30+ years. It was what was "expected".

Yes, "toebox" is the term for the space where the toes go.

I, too, have several pair of dress shoes with round, roomy toeboxes and chunky heels. I wear them sparingly, because all of the interrelated alignment problems makes balance difficult. They are attractive shoes, if a bit Goth.

Speaking of Goth, some of the Goth styles shoes and boots that I've seen would fit the requirements for roominess.

[SkirtedViking]

Sapphire and Ray I appreciate your opinions but that doesn't change the fact that society does not have to make gay associations about a guy in heels as a woman in combat shoes is not labeled a lesbian (at least in my country).

[crfriend]

]Unfortunately there is a lot of bias against men's fashion freedom.

I wonder how much of the bias or resistance is directed specifically at "fashion freedom" and how much of it is directed at something different and something unconventional.

Whilst out and about today running errands I got more than a few scowls. But, I cannot tell whether they were scowls about the coordination of my outfit, or scowls because I was a bloke wearing a skirt. Quite naturally, I'd have to suppose they were the latter, but one cannot be certain.

Humans crave consistency; there's a seeming need for things to be the same, day in and day out. If anyone disturbs that "comfort zone" they're going to come in for some flak, and that's where I think the perceived bias comes from -- we're rattling cages with our attire that is remarkably different than most people are used to.

I seriously doubt that it has one whit to do with "freestyler versus braveheart" ("Spy vs. Spy", anybody?) but rather the big picture of "that's different, do I need to be worried?" Even kilts may well get that sort of treatment when they're worn off the "usual" kilting arenas (weddings, bagpipe-playing, and kaber-tossing) because they're unusual in most settings. It's got not one whit do do with the garment it's all about the perception that the viewer has.

I do approve both bravehearts and freestylers (being one of the latter).

I'd like to go on record and state that I believe the "distinction" between the two "factions" is detrimental in the long run to everybody. On the one hand, the "bravehearts" paint themselves into a costumed corner, and the freestylers tend to make asses of themselves because they don't pay attention to the overall look that they're trying to portray as men. Parodies of women are just that -- parodies; and, I'll submit, pathetic ones at that.

It all boils down to the same thing; we're trying to change society's perception, and reaction, to a bloke in anything other than trousers. It's going to be hard; it's going to take time; it's going to take effort; and we, those trying to drive that change, are going to take some lumps for our work. What we should NOT be doing is dishing out those lumps to one another.

At the end of the day, my hand is out in friendship to anyone -- "freestyler" or "braveheart" -- who is trying to get skirted garments accepted by the general public as legitimate everyday attire for average everyday guys.

[SkirtedViking]

Well Crfd, most of the things that you said are correct in my opinion, but do not like the section of the parodies. Unless my English is not proficient enough and I misunderstood you. Noone is making an ass of himself or parodying a woman. You seem to try to generalize things. I'll do my best to post my pictures to see how much of an ass or parody am I . If your statement is equally valid then many women make parody of men. Both statements are ridiculous in my humble opinion. English is not my native language and I assume that maybe I missunderstood you, if so, please apoligize me for doing that. My freestyling is about aesthetics of exposing some parts of the male body that traditional limited options for men's clothing and shoes do not make possible. As an example show my muscular shoulders etc. And I look good as a man, not as a woman's parody and since most women dress in the so called traditional men's style these days at least in their spare time I do not look like most of them at all. And no doubt a skirt is way more comfortable for the male part of the mankind, you must have balls to wear a skirt .

[sapphire]

Skirted Viking
My comments regarding high heeled shoes were only from a health and medical perspective.

I am not saying that I would think less of you for wearing such shoes.

I am saying that high heels are a poor choice, health-wise and medically.

[SkirtedViking]

Yes, I understood you Sapphire. But there are just more aesthetical (my opinion) and let's say fashionable. Men used to wear heels, not only skirts as a normal part of their outfit.

[sapphire]

I totally understand what you say from an aesthetical and historical perspective.

AND I support that aesthically heels and skirts are more attractive. I also support your desires to wear whatever you want. I just don't think that style of shoe is good for you in the long run, even if you look fabulous right now.

At one time both men and women had their lower ribs surgically removed so that they could have tiny waists. I don't agree with that fashion either. I'm not saying that you would ever do that. It is just an example that some fashion trends are hurtful.

Can we call a truce? I support your freedom to wear whatever you want, even if, in my opinion it is bad for you.

Peace.

[crfriend]

do not like the section of the parodies. Unless my English is not proficient enough and I misunderstood you. Noone is making an ass of himself or parodying a woman. You seem to try to generalize things.

That's valid criticism, and please allow me to narrow the field down a little bit and state where I, personally, stand in the spectrum of things.

I generalised too much in my assertion that "freestylers tend to make asses of themselves"; I should have put that as, "extreme freestylers" (i.e. those "without boundaries"). That was my error, and I apologise for it.

Actually, as far as the "spectrum" goes, I'm more of a "freestyler" (by the current definition) than I am a "braveheart". I present unequivocally as a man; my mannerisms are completely male and I sport a full beard. Viewed frontally, I cannot possibly be mistaken for a woman. From the rear, it may be clouded somewhat as I have waist-length hair, but I also have a purely masculine build. However, instead of boxing myself into the "Kilt Korner" I made the conscious choice to "push the envelope" a bit. Part of that is that I am one cheap sonofab**ch that can't see parting with the better part of a thousand US bucks for an all-up kilt rig. The other part is that I regard kilts as a highly specific subclass of skirt and I'd like to see the notion broadened somewhat.

I'll do my best to post my pictures to see how much of an ass or parody am I

"Back in the old days" when avatars were a bit larger, I had a shot of me in my black tiered skirt, my red vest, and a "poet's shirt" that Sapphire made for me. Eighty pixels, however, aren't enough to do it justice. I'll see if I can dig out the original to put online.

[Departed Member]

But there are just more aesthetical (my opinion) and let's say fashionable. .

Ahh, the tyranny of 'fashion'! Countless millions of folk have fallen prey to 'fashionable' shoes and have the deformities and broken limbs, etc. to prove it! From an aesthetic point of view, watching someone hobble around in high heels is rather low on the list of fashion 'highpoints'.

Men used to wear heels, not only skirts as a normal part of their outfit.

Like when? Couple of hundred years ago, maybe some of the chaps short of stature may have worn 'raised' heels (& soles), but not the asinine footwear of today! It's no different from the extreme footwear fashions of the '70s, with their OTT platform shoes/boots - good for a laugh, but not what you could call 'practical footwear'!