FastFreddy2

Best laid plans etc. Set off late, so only got as far as Milton Keynes. Spent from 2.30pm to 7.15pm walking around in heels. Don't know why, but I spotted more people [girls. men, school children] looking at my shoes today, than any other 3 days out combined. And that was with me wearing my 'regular' shoes, not the thinner/higher ones I'd taken to change into if things were going well. I wasn't phased, but still find myself a little incensed at the rudeness of other folk. They've either had a very sheltered upbringing, or have dull lives, if me walking around can attract their attention long enough for them to be caught staring .... And I always stare back. Got some interesting pictures with the new camera. Will post them here in a couple of days.... Meadow Hall tomorrow, but an earlier start planned.

Now that, is a bicycle.

Will be travelling 140 miles to Meadow Hall, Sheffield today. Was there some 15 years ago, on a works visit. Not been back since, and certainly not been there as a heel wearer. If all goes well on the journey [2½ hours each way] it could be an interesting day. I'll have my new camera, so getting pictures of the day out should be possible.

Given that I don't find feet particularly attractive at all (don't find anyone's foot that attractive), I can't say I'm surprised. For the most part, they are usually crooked, or misshapen, even if they've never been in high heels. There must be plenty of perfectly shaped feet with straight toes and good proportions, but I've yet to spot them. With that conclusion in mind, I can fully understand anyone disliking clear/semi-transparent toe boxes. Most feet look better safely hidden inside an attractive leather covering. That said ..... (and now to slightly contradict myself) ...... I liked -a lot- the Louboutins I posted pictures of further up the thread. Especially the ones with the red toe? Here's a few more examples spotted on Celeb's. The woman aren't bad looking either. ......

Tried the Olympus Tough 820 during daylight with ISO set to 1600. Image quality is better, but many of the photo's posted here have been cropped. [ie. reduced in size to remove distracting/surrounding detail.] The cropping edit may suggest the image quality is lower than it was in the original, as the balance of the image size might well be less than a quarter of the starting size. Brightness levels were significantly higher, and freezing motion wasn't a problem. The best of the bunch: Making a purchase. (No motion.) Having a chat with colleague. Outside. (Frozen motion.) How it's done. (Smoke and mirrors.) Very attractive lady in tube skirt and stiletto heels. Inside. (Frozen motion.) Another chat with a colleague. (Not the same people - obviously?) Attractive lady in OTK boots. Great outfit. Trying on shoes. (Tall attractive girl.) Decisions, decisions. Decisions, decisions II. While the new Sony is half the thickness of the Olympus (and twice the price), I can buy the Olympus in the UK.... So far, it comes highly recommended.

The weather is getting equally messed up here. Autumn/Winter 2010 was about the coldest here on record. I spent 6 weeks living in a (new for me) house with barely adequate heating. I spent several of the coldest nights, going to bed half dressed. Even with the central heating on, some rooms were not tolerable without some sort of gillet or thermal cover like fleecy jacket. Autumn/Winter 2011 wasn't as bad for us in the South, but others had it bad again. Not only were they two of the coldest winters in living memory, but the seasons were both dry. At the start of 2012, restrictions on the use of hose pipes were promised, and did get announced. We were looking at drought conditions as reservoirs were already 30-40% low at the start of the warmer/drier season. The dry winter was replaced by a very very very wet spring, followed by the a wet start to the summer. As I reported elsewhere, the reservoirs filled to their high Autumn/Winter marks, during spring, a situation almost unheard of. Floods were not uncommon, as the ground became fully saturated. Thankfully we had some respite for the Olympics. I doubt anyone can accurately predict the coming weather as far forward as December/January/February, but I think it fair to say no-one in the UK is looking forward to it. With the cost of energy pricing going up again, it's something of a double whammy. I'm becoming more and more aware of the need to continually improve the insulation of my abode. In Texas, I guess the issue would be how well the air-conditioning is working?

Tried these on at Zara while out on Friday. Their UK8 sometimes comes up a bit small, but not these. But for the metal tip - which is okay style wise but a no-no for a man - these might have been purchased.

Ours never really got started... Again. Re-reading the entire thread, I recall feeling 2011 was the wettest I could remember. As reported, the wettest for 20 years. Now looking back on the summer of 2012, I can confirm it was the UK's wettest summer on record. I too would like to be buying new boots. High heeled welly boots.

Another interesting report, and technically perfect photo. Your wife has caught your heel at exactly it's most exposed position. The journey out and accompanying illustration making it almost like reading the blog you don't want to commit to. Seriously, the normality of it, is very encouraging.

Fair comment. For myself, I'm happy at a little pressure. I wore heels today for around 4 hours in public. I would have made faster progress with my afternoon if I hadn't worn them, but I knew full well if I didn't wear them, I would have regretted not making the effort. It's easy, easier, to come here and read without making the effort to be creative and post something. Less extrovert members might say (in their defence for not contributing) that they do so little no-one would be interested. I can't agree. If one man say's he wears heels for one hour a day, he's a lone voice in a big space. If 20 men say they wear heels for one hour a day, that's a small crowd in a [now] less big place. If 200 men say they wear heels for one hour a day, that's a community who wears heels filling any space. Not a blog, but a linked set of reports, a scrapbook of events .... Whatever it might be, will help us all consider our interest in heels to be more normal than we think it now. I write here as often as I can, not just to [hopefully] inspire men and women to move toward acceptance of men in heels, but to help create a legacy [in younger minds perhaps] that it's okay to be a man and enjoy wearing heels. I'm seldom without the self-induced pressure to continue my heeling interest, and write the narrative for it. And for me that's no bad thing.

Good choice of boot! Looks very passable/wearable. Collecting photo's of yourself under one thread is an excellent idea, and would amount to a blog? It would allow us all to see what you'd been up to in heels. While few post here, many read the boards without being members, and I know members also read the board without first logging in. [i've been told this directly, so know it to be true.] As for the Members Gallery, it's a bit of a strange one. Could be (and I don't know for sure) you need to make more posts? It might be you need to make 10 or 15 first? I've read of others having trouble using it, though I haven't..... The only difference I'm aware of between them, was post count. They've both upped that, and seem to be using the Gallery now, as expected. That said, I believe the Gallery is viewable by anyone. Including pictures in a thread like this, means you have to be a member to see them - and may be more attractive if you want to keep your face more discreet?

Yes. It helps when there are people around compelled to write. (That would be me.) I have a new friend interested in writing/contributing here too, but his application to join hasn't made in progress in a couple of weeks. I know from being a member of another forum for almost 10 years, old hands that have seen (read) it all are less likely to write, so new/more energetic members are possibly going to be the more active members perhaps? It's been some time since a long standing member here, contributed.... I've mentioned before, some of the attraction of other forums, that will include HHplace for example, is the presence of female members. Eoneleg is the exception (and exceptional), but her postings in HHplace are significantly greater than here. And why not? I hadn't thought of it until today, but possibly the Heels4Men forum title may have some connotations I hadn't recognised? Something a bit worse than a private Gentlemans Club.... Not that one would let me in. ....

Your prerogative. Not looking to pry, just making conversation.

What a pictured that painted when I read your remark. Using the word "giant" instantly made you 8ft tall, not 6. Begs the question; how did you get into heel wearing? Typically, some interest or experience between 7 to 10 years old? I'm asking because "at first look" you might not seem like the obvious candidate for heel wearing, but you plainly are. (And quite right too! ) Was walking around a DIY store last evening, dressed in paint daubed jeans, undersize top and worn (flat) shoes. [ie work clothes.] I was invisible. Nearly went home for some heels!

Nice report. I wish it seemed that simple. My interest in heels is to all intents, life long. I'm comfortable in heels, and I'm comfortable wearing them around people any time. BUT, I do not want to be at the sharp end of any loud or aggressive ridicule. Been with someone who attracted this sort of interest once, and I endeavour to ensure I don't find myself in the same situation. Consequently I don't make what I feel were the mistakes he made. I cover my heels. I don't wear patent. [And certainly not in daylight.] I make sure I don't wear heels I can't walk in. [My legs are straight when extended, and my knees stay close together.] Even with these precautions, I was noticed in modest heels while walking past some youths loitering outside a busy supermarket in Watford a while back. I suspect the only reason I escaped criticism/abuse, was my (sometimes) intense look. I am a happy chappie, but I can look like I'm up for an argument anytime someone wants one. This fear, doesn't stop me wearing heels altogether (obviously), and doesn't stop me wearing high slim heels sometimes. But I tend to be more cautious than maybe I need to be. Even people who notice, people who rudely stare, have probably forgotten the incident in minutes. Takes me a bit longer, but it does usually get put to one side. Can't imagine a time I would wear heels in a work place. Well, I can imagine I suppose, but I can't see the dream becoming a reality. Despite everything I've done during my life, I'm still basically a conformist.

Rihanna has been in the news again ..... Wearing some interesting shoes ........

I agree the weight will be greater than the shoes and boots I am used to sending, as heaviest so far including packing, came in under 1.5kgs. Those knee boots might 'volume out' too? The faster you want to send them, the more detail you want while in transit [ie tracking] will cost more of course. We in the UK might use ParcelForce to send something cheap and bulky anywhere in the world, for not much money. But no tracking (no way of knowing if it's actually delivered) and very little compensation is the recipient claims 'undelivered'. I think this service is tilted toward inexpensive gifts sent to relatives or friends abroad. As before, I've now sent shoes to Canada, Sweden and Ireland using a Royal Mail International Tracked service. Quick, tracked [signature on receipt] and came in around £30-£35 per package if I remember. But all of these would have been under 1kg. Around 7 years ago, I had to return a heavy [2kg+] package to the US, that was delivered faulty on receipt. Cost me £72 even then, for a fully tracked and insured [£1600] carriage, to get it back. Was a very unpleasant experience I haven't repeated. Some of my buyers have been critical of my postage costs, but I won't send anything unless a signature is needed on receipt. I doubt there are many rogues out there, but carelessness [loss] and mis-deliveries [delivered to wrong door number] could cause me problems I'd sooner avoid. And buyers are no better. A number of times recently, I've had the wrong postcode included with the rest of the address. Twice they've had a single wrong digit, which is bad enough, but another had the postcode from a completely alternate [previous] address.... Consequently I check every one before sending.

While waiting for the GH3 to arrive, I've been searching for news most weeks. It seems Panasonic have done as expected, and waited until Photokina next week (18th Sept) to announce it. The camera seems like it will have all the features I would like, and some I'm not sure I would need. One of those features is broadcast quality video and sound..... The anticipated price is £1600/$2000 for the body and basic lens kit. As a once off purchase, I could buy, but something better will come alone in 2 years (or less), how would I feel about that? While looking for reviews of pre-production units I came across a You Tube channel run by a professional, who had uploaded a vid saying that asking him about the GH3 would be fruitless, as he wasn't privy to any advance info at the time of the videocast. However, he did make mention to a the new G5 !! A model I was completely unaware of. [Where was a G4?] So I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWt-2VfDr-o. Seems he dislikes the G3 for the same reasons I did. The G5 has improved in the critical areas, and his recommendation was very good. While the camera isn't available throughout the UK [unless grey imported], stock is on its way. [The other side of Photokina, probably]. This will be priced around the £800 mark for a similar basic kit to the one I bought last year. So similar money, but what for me would be a significantly better camera. I plan to keep the Olympus Tough 820. A bit pricey for a 'stand-by' take-anywhere-camera at £229 (Mrs Freddy has something quite similar for £50), but being black and configured not unlike a phone makes it very discreet. Especially since there's no lens popping out as with Mrs Freddy's camera. Be nice to have a 'proper' camera too. But can I live with having two quality cameras? [Probably ..... ]

3kg's is a lot of weight for a pair of shoes or boots? Our National Carrier is Royal Mail. They have a separate business for moving parcels around the world called ParcelForce Worldwide. Private companies like TNT/DHL might be cheaper, but I haven't priced up the costs with them as their services are usually fully tracked, and are likely to be more expensive than the cheapest ParcelForce options. Dimensions weren't given, so I priced it on a 10cm x 20cm x 30cm package. This gave the cost of transporting the weight, rather than the volume. If the package was 100cm x 100cm x100cm, then the package would be charged by volume, not weight. If you have dimensions, and the package 'volumes out', the pricing would change. See 3kg results in screen shot below:

Mrs Freddy is looking to buy some patent [flat] knee boots by Carvela. Debenhams have a 25% sale on, which could save her £45. We may pop down to Oxford Street on Thursday evening, so she can try a pair on. Stock in her size is thin on the round, so I've proposed a visit to have a search around the stores there. I've confessed my interest is an evening out in heels. We are both interested in her owning some Kurt Geiger OTK boots, but they are currently £270. They have no heel to speak of, but a lot of leather covering legs. If I can get a picture, I'll surely post it here.

Another two pairs gone. The boots I took back also got sold (again) too. I really should have a count up, to see how many I've moved on. The thigh boots are still here. I passed up the opportunity to list them for free last week, as I think there's a continuing shortage (or fear of shortage) in disposable liquid assets. [aka money.] One of my £40 listings had over 200 views with 8 watchers. Still no bids? I shouldn't be surprised. I've some designer brand boots that are found offered for sale from $200 to $350 when sold directly in the US. Bringing them over here would usually add $40 to the purchase. Plus the VAT, now at 20%. Suggesting these might have a cost to a UK buyer over £200 to own them, wouldn't be entirely unrealistic. I have them offered at £40 too, but no interest. Well I say no interest, 5 watchers and over 60 views, but no bidders. After a period of not selling, I tend to reduce the selling price until a buyer arrives. I sold some £30 New Look, 4" black stiletto shoe boots with leather uppers and seriously padded footbeds .... for £4-99. I tried them for fit before wrapping and dispatching. Felt like wearing a glove. Leather too. But they had to go. I have far too many pairs to keep everyone shoe or boot I own. BUT I won't give away the expensive stuff. Maybe I need to wait until the cold weather arrives, to see if they sell. If not, I'll just wear them. If anyone is going to enjoy a £200 boot [that no-one wants to buy at £40], that would doubtless sell at the give away price of £10, I might as well get the pleasure of wearing them. They are worth more than £10 to me, even if I'll be stressed knowing I've such expensive footwear on.

You would likely get more 'hits' in the US, given the 5 fold increase in population over the UK. But getting men in heels talking to each other seems to be a struggle, much less meeting others face-2-face. It's a good concept though.

No, the metal heel does curve inwards. Not by much, but it puts the heel tip under the heel of the shoe instead of behind it. I would imagine it makes the style easier to walk in too.

Another 'pin' heel, this time from Casadei. Good job it's not leather (and not available in my size?)

With the photo's above, flash was not used. The camera's ISO setting was either 3200 or 6400. [i didn't keep records of which was used.] I also tried to use the camera's video option in what was quite a well lit area. [Refer to "Two girls walking".] When I say well lit, I mean well lit given the time of day; midnight. While trying a third or fourth attempt at videography, I got an interesting subject in the frame. As I can't edit or hide the identity of the people in the recording, I have taken some screen shots from the clip. The video seems to be better quality than the photo's, which I don't at this time, fully understand? Here are the three screen shots: Full width image: Two 'detail' shots: So far, I'm impressed with my £230 purchase.