I love heels but my feet are very sensitive and I have to be careful what I buy. The ball of my foot gets sore and those stupid inserts you can buy just make the shoe uncomfortably tight.
I have some heels but they have rounded toes so the shoe is more comfortable.
Holy shitballs and fire.
When you said those Christian Louboutin's were insanly expensive, I didn't expect $1000 for a pair.
Those insanely expensive, comfortable high heels....
can anyone provide evidence that they enable the foot to carry the weight of the person in an evenly distributed manner?
It doesn't matter how well made the high heel shoe is, the human body is not built to carry one's weight on the front of the foot.
They make these inserts to heels, called "Insola" they attempt to make the wearers weight lean back more on the persons heels. Some shoe manufacturers are actually building these insoles right into their shoes.
I do own some heels for work I occassionally wear, only because, as someone mentioned, a particular pair of pants won't look right without them, and I've put the Insolas in them.....they help, but, to be honest, I'd be smarter to get rid of the pants that don't fit into my lifestyle. They particular pairs of shoes I have with heels are actually comfortable...but I know that's just the surface impression. One the occassion I wear them, I try to do so on a day where I know I won't be walking much.
Not only are heels bad for your feet, they throw your entire body; hips, knees, calves, back, shoulders, neck out of whack....regardless of the designer.
If men were required to wear heels, those types of shoes would become illegal.
Not to male bash, but I'm sure they became popular mainly because of how men tought they looked.
no, they're not required, but, neither was foot binding actually. Yes, your family could physically force you to do it, because you were only a child when they first bound your feet. But, if for some reason your feet weren't bound, you could pretty much kiss your chance at getting a husband, or any respect in life goodbye.
Heels aren't required either, technically. Many women have simply bought into the idea it's one of the best ways to look attractive.
I did for a long time.
Now, I don't.
I spent too much money putting my body in alignment to f*ck it up over a pair of stupid shoes.
sozobe wrote:I have some like that now, I think. Sounds like a revival of 40's-style shoes, which keep coming back.
I have these:
And I love love love them. Can't believe how comfortable they are.
I do know what you mean about women who are obviously in pain though. I object to painful fashion pretty much across the board.
Those are adorable. They look comfortable, well-made.
Phoenix32890 wrote:Someone once said (I don't remember who) that the high heel is the western equivalent of the bound foot.
In my younger years, I wore spike heels with long, pointy toes. Believe me, they did not do my feet any good, and today I am paying the price for that bit of feminine frippery.
Once, in around the early seventies, there was a style that had rounded toes, with a high heel. The difference was that the heel was very thick, and therefore gave good support. I had a pair of those, and I could actually run around in them all day, in complete comfort.
I can't understand why that style fell out of favor in a matter of months! 
Feminine frippery! Touche.
I think Chai is full of poop . . . men wear high heels, too . . .
This guy seems to be enjoying his high heels . . .
These guys look like they're having fun . . .
Eh.
what chai said.
mind you, this comes from someone who literally does not wear shoes unless in a grocery store, or some other public place.
( Not even to work, do I wear shoes )
now quit smellin my bait woman.
sozobe wrote:I have some like that now, I think. Sounds like a revival of 40's-style shoes, which keep coming back.
I have these:
And I love love love them. Can't believe how comfortable they are.
I do know what you mean about women who are obviously in pain though. I object to painful fashion pretty much across the board.
That is the type of shoe I wear - high heel, but wider heel to give you more support.
I'd love to have some comfortable high heeled shoes! But since the third time I broke my left ankle (all different bones, different breaks) I can't wear heels at all, not even "flats". River sandals, Crocs, and negative-heel shoes are the entire makeup of my shoe collection now. I could probably wear Birkenstocks but the river sandals serve about the same purpose...
Wy- And I am just the opposite. I could never wear negative heel shoes, "ballet slipper" type shoes, or any sort of flats for that matter. I have a lousy back, and find that a sturdy (read "comfort") sandal with a wedge heel about 2 inches high throws my weight forward, and does not stress my back.
I bought these yummy sheepskin slippers, and I just can't wear them. They are just too flat, and even though they are very comfortable for my feet, my back starts screaming after awhile.
So sozobe wears sensible shoes...
Why am I not surprised?!
I'm with ehBeth. I have all sorts in my closet. I love my gold brocade stilettos to death, even if I do only wear them a few times a year. (The holidays are coming! Hooray!) For teaching or giving tours at the art museum, though, I prefer my black ecco ankle boots. They have good support and 2-1/2" wide heels. In the summer, it's almost exclusively flat sandals. Gotta mix it up.
They're not actually the only pair of shoes in my closet... ;-)
You have them in other colors, too?
Bella - and now ...
Quote: Ok Magazine reports that little Suri has a pair of custom-made Christian Louboutin shoes worth $2,500 on their way.
~~~
I just picked up some Louboutin knock-offs worth about 1/100th of that for the holiday parties - red patent and leopard print. Worth the money for a season :wink:
