Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

    0.00 GBP 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by FastFreddy2

  1. I have two 'ticketed' gigs lined up so far this year. One local, early start so no heels there. Second one, back to a venue I previously said I would not return to. It's been 3 years, and a lot of water has passed under the bridge.... This time I hope to manage things a bit better, so "cock-ups" are avoided. I plan to wear court shoes again. I'm really tempted to wear red patent courts, but this might be a bit too much.
  2. If you aren't overly keen on dry wines .... this might be worth a try: Widely available, for £6.50 a bottle, or £5.50 on promotion. (Which it currently is.) This is quite nice too. Quite sweet, and £8 for a 50cl bottle. I tend to have 20mm in a highball, topped up with cold lemonade, and ice (if I've made some.)
  3. I am beside myself. Darcey Bussell has left Strictly.
  4. It's Monday so, one of my 'post' days .... Another function missing from the Canon the Lumix has, is in-body focus stacking. (Merging multiple images.) Here's the thing, the Lumix is a camera made for the user. The Canon is a camera made for taking pictures. I like using the Lumix, the Canon, not so much. That said.... I did a shoot in February using the Canon and strobe lighting in a studio type environment. The image quality far surpasses that of the Lumix, which might not surprise too many people given the file size is 50% larger. Better yet, with promotional offers, and makers cash-backs, the Canon was actually cheaper than the Lumix. So better quality images, for less money. The images produced so good on the Canon, I can count eyelashes on the sitter. Unless I or the sitter wanted a substantially large print, I would think a larger file size would be superfluous. Yet I pine for better. I am crazy for sure. Currently on my wish list, a used Sony A7Rii (circa £1300) with a £600 - £900 85/90/100 mm prime lens. Why? Because I do. I've a friend who today, spent £5k on an E-bike. That doesn't seem so weird, or unusual, except that only a month ago, he spent £5k on a similar "top spec" (works carbon) mountain bike, he may now never ride. Two or three years ago, he spent £2.5k on a road bike, I'm pretty sure he hasn't used much. Compared to my wealthy mate, I am a novice.
  5. It is, I think, and for dummies like me - it works. Not often, but it has happened, where the headline mentions 'sky high heels'..... And then doesn't show a picture of the heel.
  6. Yes it does. Exactly the attitude that keeps this site 'ultra niche'. If you want to build an attractive place in the cyber world for people to 'meet and greet', you surely don't want to encourage singular activity which by it's very nature, would exclude them from here? Obviously you do, but is it working? I think not. As for the quoted comment regarding book reading is on the increase - joke surely? Book reading is not on the increase in the Western world.
  7. It would appear, my verbose mutterings (welcome or not) at least make a contribution in keeping the place ticking over. Nothing written here for over 3 weeks, it looks like. Obviously, no other active member is a frustrated author (or someone without a life.) I think men looking at men wearing women's clothing must be a lot more entertaining than we are led to believe, or this site would be a lot busier having attracted HHp members over? Not that I have a view either way ..... Actually, I do have a view.... I don't mind anyone wearing anything, as long as it looks attractive. I have been sent links taken from HHp of slim men wearing women's clothing, that looks just as attractive style-wise, as it might on a woman. (Big 'hurrah'.) To counter that, I have seen women wearing women's clothing, that looked just awful. In some ways it's about making the most of what you "have". Diet and exercise can change the basic starting point. Age can pretty much thwart everything. (I don't mean being over 30, I mean being over ... 50 or 60 perhaps). 'Life', meaning age related "wear and tear" can take a toll. Young skin in a dress, is always going to look better than old skin in a dress. That said, old skin can look good too, it's just a bit harder to get there. I would put old slim over young over-weight any day, when it comes to dressing to be elegant/attractive. Certain shapes, suit (sorry) certain styles. Since stopping full-time work (again), I have put on weight and am currently looking at ways to get my waist-size down. With my sweet-tooth, and capacity to gorge on cake without the feeling of sugar-sickness often felt through over indulgence, it's a hard fight. What doesn't help, is the people around me like to offer 'treats' too frequently. I'm loathe to refuse hospitality, so I indulge. Dunno about about FastFreddy, maybe FatFreddy? The solution is to use the mountain bike I bought last Autumn. Last week I fitted mudguards, and changed the tyres to puncture resistant ones, that want to work given how much they cost. (I've bought cheaper tyres for my car!!!) I have a plan .... So men wearing whatever they like is okay with me. As long as they look 'the part'. Same it true of woman. Who am I to judge? No-one, but I will, just as everyone does. We are programmed (DNA) to judge in the first 3 seconds of initial contact: friend or foe. I have seen things on sites (not just HHp) that don't work for the wearer. In the context of a personal fantasy, anything goes, but publish a look that doesn't 'work' at your own risk. If the active members of this site want to attract members from elsewhere, then there needs to a fundamental shift in what members believe is attractive to prospective new members. While the following will seem a bit caustic, I am making the comments that at worst could be perceived as "tough love". In writing CV's, I have read (and given advice) on what should and shouldn't be included. Two "absolutely never" interests are: reading: needlecraft/painting/going to cinema (for example). Why? because they are all solitary pastimes. When recruiting, you are looking for a team member. Starting a thread about reading books? Surely it needed a film trailer to cross reference? We are a visual culture. Few people read books, few have the time/inclination. Another thread detailing a very old film suggesting the clothing worn in the film depicting a scene over four hundred years ago, would be an attractive notion if those styles returned? There is more chance of powdered wigs returning ... Where was the film trailer, cross-referencing styles in an encyclopedic way? Why were long boots worn then? Living in a cold draughty castle? Riding on horse-back? Neither of those circumstances exist as part of normal life these days, and 'need' is a great driver for clothing. Long boots for men will never return unless there is a global catastrophe. Q: What threads would be interesting/attractive to men who like to wear heels or like looking at heels? What are the 'slam-dunks'? A: Threads about heels. With pictures, video's, articles.... Places to buy, costs, quality. Stories .... Who doesn't like a story? Lets say there are 5 active members here. Pick a day of the week, and write something about heels on that day every week. Pick a day someone else hasn't picked. Tell a story from your past, or a plan of something you expect to do in the near future. Or link an article that has pictures, and give a summary of your thoughts. Absolutely no-one here is too stupid to do these things. Some are a bit 'idle' (like to read rather than contribute) but that might change if the active members lead the way to a righteous path. I'll take Saturday, and at least one other day. Monday maybe. If there is at least one new response every day, there's a longterm reason to keep visiting, and maybe visit every day?
  8. I suspect dww thinks you are having a "holier than thou" moment, and trying to justify being "holier than thou" confirms your position. I've explained to you this isn't a critique thread. Never was, never will be. But you are insistent you can say/do whatever you want about my taste in something special. You might well be able to post what you want, be there are consequences to doing that. 1. I will not post anything on this thread ever again. 2. Since my posts are being criticised and I'm finding myself arguing about it, I will abdicate from all communication/posts until March. If I then find myself in a similar position when I return, I will add you to my "ignore" list. I really can't be bothered to participate in a Forum where I have to justify myself. Life is too short. Lastly: Céline Dion, 50, says critics of her slimmer frame should 'leave her alone' as she finally addresses relationship with 'handsome toyboy' Pepe Munoz By REBECCA DAVISON FOR MAILONLINE PUBLISHED: 09:02, 29 January 2019 | UPDATED: 21:33, 29 January 2019 Céline Dion is set to headline the British Summer Time Concert in Hyde Park this year after her 15 year Las Vegas residency came to an end. And the iconic singer, 50, has addressed her 'slimmer figure', iconic sense of style, and those rumours of a relationship with 'toyboy' Pepe Munoz. Talking to The Sun, Céline said her new sense of style (which is incredible) and her slimmer frame has been criticised. +5 Outspoken: Céline Dion, 50, has said that critics of her slimmer fame should 'leave her alone' as she finally addresses her relationship with 'handsome toyboy' Pepe Munoz +5 He's my handsome best friend: Céline addresses rumours that she is now dating 'toyboy' Pepe Munoz, a Spanish backing dancer, who is always by her side as she brands herself 'single' She said: 'If I like it, I don't want to talk about it. Don't bother. Don't take a picture. If you like it, I'll be there. If you don't, leave me alone.' She also told Lorraine: 'It [an interest in fashion] has always been part of me, but the way we used to work before was maybe more conservative. 'If now I have an opportunity to wear haute couture and the things that make me feel beautiful, strong, fearless, feminine attractive… even if it was just for me. You cannot please everyone all of the time.' Well said Celine.
  9. This is a critique part of the Forum, knock yourself out. "In the flesh" these looked taller, and the heel isn't exactly unpleasant. The real stopper is the price. Even reduced to £120, and assuming they had my size, I doubt I'd be making a purchase. That might change if I worked in an office and could wear these at work. That 4.25" is a very wearable height for my size 8 feet, and I'd like to wear heels for a work day or work week to get the experience of it. Ho-hum.
  10. I am pleased, as will be others of course, at your contributions and effort you put into this Forum too. However, there is a well known saying that runs something like: "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything." (I might be paraphrasing, but the gist of it is there.) This isn't a thread for critique, that function is found on another section in the Forum - as shown. My hope is/WAS, others would contribute to the Something Special thread with links of images of media they too thought might be considered special. It was never meant to be an opportunity for people to tell me I was mistaken in my view of what I consider special, no more than I would be inclined to disagree with anyone else's viewpoint on what they thought was special. In fact my attitude toward 'negative posting' extends to ignoring several posts in another section of the Forum where critiquing is expected. I really don't like some of the shoes/boots shown, but rather than post something negative about styles others feel attractive, I've written nothing. I know through experience and training, negative posting - especially on matters of taste, leads to members keeping their thoughts to themselves. If you must write that you don't like an image and are compelled to say so, then you must. But please resist the temptation to challenge me on why I thought it 'Special'. These women have tens of millions of followers on social media. Anything they do, and likely everything they do is seen daily by those millions, because their followers are interested in the lives of these women, and the fashion statements they make from time to time. If there's a question to be answered, it's "what are you failing to see, the rest of us can see?" As to continuing with this thread, I think I'm pretty much done with it. If the content is so unpleasant, what's the point? I'm not looking for an answer by the way, as there isn't nor could there be any point.
  11. While out shopping today, I noticed these. Reduced in store to something like £120. The heel is not as high as I would like, but the sort of heel that could be worn all day (if the opportunity arose.) What attracted me to them was the narrow-ish shaft, and small spacing between the lacing eyelets. It suggested the boots could be tightened to fit my very slim legs. Better still if the were higher, and covered calfs.
  12. I follow fashion, and some celebrities who are involved in or around it; those affected. The ones I include here, are those that wear higher heels, or higher than you'd expect to see in everyday life (given age or status). What I don't do, is offer up images for critiquing, be that people or their clothing. There is a completely different section for that. Clue: As to the knee boots remark, you are wrong. They've just not been mainstream fashion for years. Yes they have been around for years, but then so have wellingtons, which also haven't been part of mainstream fashion for some time either. If you want to start a fashion debate, please start one by all means, but this thread isn't about debating anything, nor critiquing any look of person or their attire. It's about images of heels seen in the press, or social media. If you don't like what I post, I invite you to put me on your 'ignore' list. Of course if you do, over half of what's here to be read, will vanish. I put more effort into keeping this place ticking over, than the next 7 contributors combined. (4389 vs 3344) Have a think about that as you complain about the content I include.
  13. The lovely, Helen Mirren. At 73 ......
  14. For the past 3 -5 or so years, I would say yes. It's been ankle boots or something over the knee. But knee boots are coming back .... I'm with you on the open toes, but we don't run the fashion industry. Open toe otk/thigh boots are everywhere. Still. You might like this though >> Victoria Beckham criticised for wearing open toe boots << I don't think that's a problem you'll have to address any time soon.
  15. Working like a Trojan, she hasn't got an ounce of fat on her. As we get older, our muscle mass reduces significantly. She's probably not using Botox to pad out ageing/sagging skin either. Unlike Madonna, who looks increasingly like a cat every time I see a new picture of her. I think your comment is fair, but I sincerely hope you are wrong - for all the right reasons. As your rightly say, her grief might well be affecting her health but I hope it isn't. She's reportedly worth circa $400M and it would be a cruel twist of fate if she didn't have a long life ahead, so she could enjoy her earnings.
  16. I don't know if you know, but knee boots are coming back in a big way. That skirt probably hangs better when the wearer is stood still. I have a 'pet hate' (dislike) of baggy/loose tops tucked in waistbands though. That sweater should have been left over the skirt, or a more fitted top worn. She is a grafter who has never carried any weight. She is appearing at Paris Haute Couture week, so many of her outfits are tilted toward that event. I would be very happy to have a 50 year old that shape on my arm.
  17. Someone well known for wearing high heels, Victoria Beckham.
  18. A regular high heel wearer .... Celine Dion Always a special pleasure to see a mature lady wearing high heels.
  19. The ever lovely Kate Beckinsale ....
  20. In the absence of high heel wearing opportunities outside, I've been wearing some rubber soles 4" wedges around the house as slippers. They are what are known as 'high-tops' or as what I have always known to be considered "baseball boots". They are are challenge to get on and off because of the lacing. Better designs have a side zipper too for easy on/off. So I've been looking at EBay for some wedges. Not had any luck really. Obviously, wedge shape heels are not that popular, at least not wedge heels on or over 4 inches. Ideally I would find something along the line of a high wedge mule or clog (clog = closed toe mule) with a rubber wedge that I could wear at home without clonking around. ... Some of the styles shown here don't look too bad.
  21. If I thought it would achieve anything, I might be tempted. But realistically, the best option is Twitter (Zara must have an account) and I would need to open or reopen an account to do that, when I really don't want to waste any more time on them. I've put the unpleasant experience behind me, and any possibility I might buy from them again. And there we have a good reason to avoid in-store purchases, and returns. A protracted returns procedure the very reason I gave up buying from House of Fraser, which was just as effective as Zara seems to be during the sale period. As a reminder, I had returned some shoes to HoF Oxford Street bought online. I saved them the return carriage cost by making a personal delivery. Showing the delivery note with all my details, wasn't enough for the supervisor to put the money back in my account, I had to present the c/c too. Not usually required these days, but it was part of their procedure. Not only did I have to present my card, but I also had to 'sign in' the receipt. The supervisor didn't like my signature compared to the signature on the card. A heavy verbal debate ensued. My stand was that I was returning goods, not taking them. Would a crook return products (I was entitled to return as the delivery note confirmed). If I returned the goods by post, HoF would have pay carriage, and neither card nor signature would accompany the goods being returned. Worse still, during that time I could sign up for 'instant' store credit, and walk out with £200+ worth of goods based on providing a name and address. The supervisor conceded this too. I got a credit on my card. A day later I got a phone call from the store General Manager, who was apologetic and agreed all my points regarding the return procedure. But it wouldn't be changing. Well, how did that work out for the group of stores? A painless returns policy 'made' Marks and Spencer. That policy took hundreds and hundreds of pounds off me over the years. Many retailers realised it gave customers comfort when buying, so have copied their procedure. John Lewis and Screwfix being obvious nominees for the 'copycat' awards. Both offer pain free returns, both are very busy businesses. That isn't their only attraction of course, but pain free returns mean customers will take products away to try (JL) or buy more than they need (SF) knowing surplus can be easily returned. Not that everything bought with a view to returning if necessary, gets returned. A side benefit of the 'easy returns' is that the returns window is sometimes missed. Been there, done that. New Look started to make life difficult for buyers, when they decided any discounted stock could not be returned. Anything you bought in a sale, had to be kept - unless bought online of course. Idiotic? Same was true of Select. No in-store purchases at all could be refunded, only store credit was offered instead, unless you bought online!! Like New Look, Select is another retail group shrinking fast with high street shops just disappearing. Of course Select quality was never great anyway. A pair of their shoes I wore for the first time, all but fell to pieces. (Written up elsewhere.) I like to support the high street, and loathe the Amazon business model, I don't see why a high street should offer a lower service than one I get online. Just doesn't add up to me. But 30 minutes queuing for returns to be processed - not acceptable Zara.
  22. As reported elsewhere (New Heels thread) I had discovered some wedge heels had been available at Zara for £40 during November/December 2018, but I had only found out about them, mid way through January 2019. These: The pair I'd found were at Brent Cross, and reduced to £30 in their sale. The pair I saw were an EU40/UK7. During the same visit I bought some flat calf length boots that looked they might be useful in the impending wet/snowy weather we are promised during the next 4 weeks. The boots were reduced to £20 (from probably £30). Both styles were from their TRF range. (TRF = cheaper/budget.) The flat boots fitted okay, but the stretch shafts were loose - as usual, although they looked like they might be slim enough. I had decided to visit a couple more Zara stores, before giving up on the wedge boots, as the boots looked really attractive. A local store (Home Counties) was tried last Wednesday, with no luck. They had the wedges, but only in a UK5 and UK6. On Friday I went to Westfield London (aka White City), to look, and to return the £20 boots. No luck with the wedges, only one pair UK7 found. Close, but no prize! While there, I decided to return the £20 boots. There was a queue for returns, but at the time I didn't want to carry the boots with me to Primarni as it's quite a trek from Zara. Well, it took 30 minutes to get my money back. The 'shower of shyte' that passes for a returns system, has the counter staff checking and re-hanging every returned item, before a refund was made. It took very nearly 25 minutes to get to the front of a 10 person queue. One person (we'll call her 'princess') has two full bags of returns. Even with the discounts from the sale items she had bought, the two receipts that were refunded ran to £175 and £60. How could someone make that many mistakes when selecting clothing? Two FULL bags of returns. Incredible. Another one of the 10, one full bag. Not that this would be a problem at Marks or J.L. but Zara staff have to re-hang and tag where necessary every single item...... So nearly 25 minutes to get to the front of the queue .... And then, and then ..... The assistant had to call the floor manager to authorise the £20 cash refund. If that didn't add to the delay enough, their internal communication system wasn't working. The assistant called for a manager several times, without getting a reply, which should have told the assistant the manager wasn't receiving the call and she should have tried the store public announcement system - the manager told her in front of us. It took over 5 minutes for someone to appear, which of course blocked the assistant from doing any more returns. You would be forgiven for thinking Zara would now be at the top of my 'avoid at all costs' list? Having made the time to go to the West End proper, I decided to go to the Marble Arch (end) branch of Zara in Oxford Street, not least because I planned to go to Primarni which is quite close to it. Nothing on the ground floor, but UNBELIEVABLY, I found an EU41/UK8 (fits like a UK7.5 but fits me) on the first floor, which I then took to the ground floor to buy. Some 8 minutes into queuing, I put the boots on a low counter, and walked out - leaving the boots behind. I wasn't prepared to spend a further 10 minutes queuing to get to the front of another queue to buy something, having already spent 30+ minutes getting my £20 back earlier in the evening. Okay, so they will sell, so no loss to Zara, but at my time of life, I have more import things to do than waste time queuing to buy shoes (of questionable quality). It's not like I'm going to lose much putting Zara on my banned list, and neither is Zara. But I was one of many people who had a bad time in two of their stores, and it won't only be me who decides they are not worth visiting again. Other stores I have complained about in the past, have gone bust (House of Fraser, and New Look being two notable ones). While Zara is (I believe) a privately owned company with a (now) mega-rich owner, a bad shopping experience can lead to a bad shopping business. 2019 is going to be another tough year for high street retailers, and given my recent shopping experience, I won't be surprised if Zara begins to close stores.
  23. You are enquiring about a car I owned for about 5 weeks, some 38 years ago. I only remember the colour because it was metallic, which I didn't like. You drove into a phone box at 100 mph, no airbags, no seat belt, no collapsing steering wheel, no impact cage, no crush zones .... And just climbed out of the rear window? If that had happened to me, I'd have been in touch with the Vatican to get my survival recognised as 'a miracle'.
  • Create New...