FastFreddy2

I have made no secret of my past experience of going 'en femme' to allow the facilitation of me wearing heels in public during social activity. While it needed some (ahemm) foundation garments to prevent bulges in the wrong places and help with bulges in the right places, I have never taken it so far as to wear ladies 'smalls', so I always recognised I was a man in womens attire. That said, I did do the full-makeup bit**, and as my hair had just started to thin a tad I did use a wig too. (Sometimes.) I've always had long nails, and I mean long, so there was no need for additions. Not that there were nail bars then as there are now. I doubt I dressed up more than five times a year over a 3 year period. It never once occurred to me, I could go out wearing heels in men's clothing. Which in hindsight, seems completely .... odd? I mention this 'history' because .... I have my doubts clothing that might be identifiable as womenswear, might not look right on a completely masculine torso, unless some feminisation of the periphery was also added. This is not about sex/or indeed sexualisation of the person, it's about the overall look. We more readily assimilate what we are familiar with. Looks that we are unfamiliar with, are more likely to be noticed, and not always in a good way. Like, a man in heels for example. In terms of decision making for that look by a woman, I'm sure the process changes over time. Young decisions are quick and made with a possible outcome from an evening out, probably being a critical factor. Later on in life, a woman will likely decide on a comfort level first, and to make sure she blends, rather than is noticed. (ie. Skirt too short, skirt too tight. None of which ever seemed to be a concern to any girl I knew in my 20's.) I'm sure their thought processes around these decisions are by need, much more complex than those employed by men, in general. Either looking at the process in work, or my limited experience of it, all suggest it's long and complicated. For me, as an example, it meant going without food on the day of the event so I could be as slim as possible for the evening. My nails would be smooth as to avoid catching on the hose I would wear. Toe nails cut short for the same reason. Legs shaved or creamed naked. Eyebrows plucked ... The list isn't endless, but it was/is long. In keeping with that, even now Mrs Freddy doesn't want to wear anything close to tight fitting, if she's having a fat day or a fat week. She (wrongly in my opinion) chooses to wear bulky clothing to (she thinks) hide her tummy. In reality, it makes her look twice the size she actually is. If you could put yourself inside the mindset required to carry out these decisions, would you really want to? ** At the time, I was doing a lot of photography, mostly portraiture. While my live in (hairdresser) girlfriend would do the female models hair, foundation and often their eye makeup, I would always - always do the lipstick. I might do the facial contouring which is again popular, and sometimes do or adjust their eye makeup if the shot needed it. I got quite adept. P.S. At this time Boy George was on the front of most newspapers, and later on so was his friend "Marilyn". Both did magazine covers, and I think B.G. even did Vogue once. This sat on the back of the New Romantic movement, a time when dandyism was everywhere and dress styles merged more than at any time before or since. Heady days.

I don't wish I had thicker calfs calves** but I do wish there was a wider selection of shaft sizes. And having been shopping with one or two women looking for a knee boot, I can confirm 'wider' is probably more popular than slim, with the more mature lady anyway. I think the broader calf is typical of men too? **I have always treated "calves" as four legged animals bred for meat or milk. Grammarist.com tells me that my original term is not the 'generally accepted' way of expressing the plural of calf, with some considering it an error. I have self-corrected the potential mistake.

Au contraire, I refer to Messrs Tesco Tricks and Deceit Co. Ltd. Who use a yellow sticker system, often placed beneath something that isn't 'on offer', but might relate to something in close proximity. They are also keen to exploit the 'special offer' of 8 items (toilet roll) that is actually a more expensive buy than 2 off 4 packs. Catch them at the right moment though, and the price of their short dated produce is hard to beat. IE, two off loaves of bread, at 10p each. (Both straight in the freezer.) I like ASDA because there is some chance their jeans will fit, and they are slightly more sincere with intention of providing value for money. When I leave Tesco, I am compelled to check I have a full compliment of fingers .... As for reviews, I always go straight to the lowest ratings. I read 5 or 10, as I'm looking for the Achilles heel of the product. 'Wrong colour', 'slow delivery' or anything like it are discounted. Two or three "broke down on second day" type reviews exclude the product unless they were posted in 2012, and the 2015 reviews are all exemplary. Miele would be my preferred brand for a cylinder cleaner too, if I only I had the where-with-all for one. That said, my 'work' vacuum cleaner is a Goblin 1000 which I have owned since 1983/84. Given what I paid (not much) and the service I've had, a Miele wouldn't have been overly expensive if it lasted as long. The chap I buy bags from, is amazed I have a working one. So am I given the debris it has collected for me over the years. The bag in it is currently full of brick dust. I can't count how many time it has been so. Mrs Freddy, rather unkindly I think, describes it as a Family Heirloom. Women!

Mrs Freddy can 'nose out at bargain' at the supermarket, now she has a handle on the "xx" per £ or per kg label they often provide. She likes using the one supermarket though as she does the bulk of the shopping and it is a chore. She insists the familiarity of the venue allowing her to minimise her time there. I would and have tried others, with ASDA being my preferred choice (on balance). There is an ALDI not far away, but parking isn't a pleasant experience. 'Standard procedure' is to check the items bought at discount were actually registered at the till as discounted products. Some supermarkets are legend for this, and the one we use is the leader-of-pack for it. Overall, Mrs Freddy is less resistant to a 70% off 'bargain' when it comes to clothing for herself. She has two large wardrobes here, literally crammed full, most of which I'm adamant hasn't seen the light of day .... Her version of my shoe collection I suppose. These days we seldom buy household goods or electricals, without some reference to retailer reviews or a review site.

The boots in the last picture are higher than 3½ inches I would agree. There is a hidden platform I would say too, so the rise might be closer to 3½ than the 4 and something inch heel.

That second pair look like something I had tried on at NL but I needed a larger size than the shop had. They are high! The links worked. You can now add pictures directly from other sites. Copy the 'URL' from the picture (you might have to right click to get the URL, while your cursor is over the picture). Then go back into the post you are writing, and click on the option in the lower right hand corner 'Insert other media'. When it says "Insert image from URL" add the URL address from the picture - right click then 'paste'. I used your link to add this: Nice choice.

I have already mentioned I hate flying, but love airports, and you have confirmed why. It's not true of Camden Market any longer, but UK airports (as Camden used to be) places where; if you were going to see someone with two heads THAT'S where you will see it. The throughput of diverse people is staggering. I have experienced similar at Waterloo, Liverpool Street and King Cross rail stations, but airports produce the most glamorous opportunities. As for people watching.... I would have a holiday for two reasons; Swimming in clear water. Spending the evening after dinner, sitting in a street café watching people walk past. In our hotel, other guest would get nicknames or titles. For entertainment, I would weave imaginary tales and lifestyles to each group we saw.

Me. About 40 years ago I listened to a man vs woman narrative on the radio. It wasn't overly serious, but the theme of it went something like this ... Her: I saved us £200 today. Him: Marvellous, well done. How did you do that? Her: I bought a new £1000 cooker that only cost us £800 because it had £200 discount on it. Him: But we don't need a new cooker? I will admit to be 'a sucker' for a bargain, and will buy something I hadn't intended to if it is cheap enough, but I do need to have a obvious/immediate use for it. For example, in Sainsbury's the other evening shopping for jeans. (There's a surprise.) While there I past the discounted chilled puds section to get a good phone signal, and spotted a discounted Summer Fruits cream trifle at 70p rather than the £1-40 it usually sells at. I went home with one, much to Mrs Freddy's delight. My resistance to shoes 'bargains' is almost zero. A shoe or boot I like, would become a must have with 70% discount.

Welcome to the perennial problem of clothing sizes for women. Almost every brand differs from every other, meaning the 'standard' is quite flexible. Some tips: 'Young shopper' sizing is likely to be 'true', meaning a size 10 might actually have the 26/27" waist it should, a 12, 28/29" waist. Places like Top Shop, River Island, Dorothy Perkins, Miss Selfridge being typical, though they too are getting a bit flexible .... Zara is a Spanish outfit, with European sizing. Their Medium would likely compare to most brands XS (Extra Small). 'Intermediate' shops, like H&M and Primarni, who have a foot in both camps, can be a bit hit and miss but tend to be a little more generous. I would take a 12 in Primarni, but a 14 in H&M sometimes. Primarni shoe sizes for example, are generous compared to every other retailer. 'Ladies' shops, like M+S, BHS, and most supermarkets, are quite generous. A size 12 is generally somewhere between a 30" (though more likely a 31") and a 32" waist. The word 'on-the-street' is that flattering customers, brings in sales. Women don't tend to do measurements, rather dress sizes. And, "I'm a size 12", sounds a lot better than "I'm a Top Shop 16". (Although I'm probably a T/S 12-14 in a trouser as I don't have hips ..... ) Other considerations ..... "Rise". This is, -in case you don't already know- is the measurement from the crotch to the waistband. For the past 10/15 years, 'waists' on womens jeans/trousers have been set low, probably for commercial advantage. Less material=more profit. Thankfully, the tide is turning. A "classic" rise, the sort we men grew up with, is currently referred to as a 'high waisted' product. It isn't, but compared to a mid or low, it is high. "High" should mean touching ribs ... Mrs Freddy has some truly high waisted trousers she wore to a wedding some years ago. It showed off her small waist and made her legs look as long as Shirley Maclaine's. The height of the heel on her shoes helped. She looked stunning, and I wasn't the only person to notice. If I can find a photo .... For me, anything less than a 10 inch rise is pointless. 11 inch rise is okay, and is typical. 11½ to 12 inches, ideal but almost unheard of. I have an 11 year old pair of straight legged (stretch) jean from M+S with an absolutely classic cut that couldn't fit me better if they had been made for me. M+S are pushing their waist position upward as this can be more flattering, though a "mid-rise" (at circa 10 inches) can help hold in a loose belly. On a lady, her hips hold the jeans up on a low or mid rise. As with most men I don't have hips or a backside to speak of, so I need a rise that will tolerate a belt to hold them in the right place - on my waist. Although it's effectively a fetish/sex shop, I would look at places like Honour for things like PVC trousers. I have looked on the world's leading auction site for shiny stuff, and it isn't simple by any means. Anything from China, about 80% of what's on offer, will only ever be making a one way trip. If it doesn't fit - tough. That said, even items from the UK that might arrive at £5 posted, might be uneconomic to return. Chinese sizing comes up small to very small - no surprise there. A great deal of the shiny leggings I have seen advertised on the auction site, come with an undeclared mid rise waist, and some even with a (declared) low rise. Using reverse logic, a high waisted product is more unusual rather than usual. Finding the right shaped article is a struggle, much less size, and then just how shiny is shiny? Going up about 10 or 12 posts, the Daisy Street High Shine PU leggings are ideal, and one I've yet to see elsewhere. (So far.) I expect to try some from the auction site, but I'm not yet satisfied I've found an adequate product. I also expect to order from both ASOS and Boohoo, as they have garments that might be suitable. I believe Daisy Street is either an ASOS brand or part owned by them? "PU" (polyurethane) and "faux leather" are synonymous for meaning - not real leather. Leather leggings worth considering typically start at around £150 and go upwards. I'm sure they are about for less, but I would doubt the quality, and the cut will likely be awful.

What crackingly good ideas!

You are plainly a man who can teach me a thing or two about saving money. Mrs Freddy is impressed. (Though I might have chosen the wrong word? )

The zip isn't always a problem. I know I have one pair with a lefthand zip, but I don't remember them all being like that... A 12 is supposed to be a 32" but as I've indicated, that could be 30-33" in my experience. I'll wear whatever fits as long as it isn't loose. That said, I have some M+S jeans that are a loose 14L but were the first pair I found with a 34" leg. I would suggest a 16L which in theory might get you a 36 waist x 33 leg. If you are set on a 32" leg, you might have to find one of the 'intermediates', meaning a Long, that is somewhere between Medium (31") and the Long. Mindful these things have stretch, I always buy 'snug' where possible in case the waist loosens up. I am mindful of my waist, despite having a sweet tooth. This means I would start to eat less if I felt my waistline was growing. I have in the past eaten volumes of cake (doughnut) etc. that would make others physically ill. Because of this, I stay away from obvious temptation. We almost never have cake in the house, and at £4 a pop I almost never eat it while away from home. Profiteroles are my only 'official' allowance. I can easily eat a portion declared suitable for 4 people.

Completely agree. As does my shoe collection. My millionaire/longest standing friend would disagree..... My wife would tell you, that I would disagree ..... Reading above, I suspect Puffer's good lady wife, would say he would disagree .... In this instance, I would see it as an investment in my general well-being. It's been a terrible year (on top of a couple of not great years), and none of us are getting any younger. The encouragement is welcome.

Unlike 98/99% of mens jeans, and 100% of mens trousers, "ladies" leg wear, almost always comes with stretch these days. Try some. Although I have been compelled to wear a ladies jean most of my life (and loose trousers for formal wear) mens jeans are an appalling fit when compared to the multitude of ladies versions. Once you get past the 'which section did they come from' hurdle, there is no looking back.

Part of the 'interest' for sparky No.2 to do the job, might be that he's able to offload one of his 'stock' plastic consumer units... That said, I don't like the sound of the unit offered anyway so ..... I had a browse of the hard to use Toolstation web site and initially was disappointed..... Until I found this: Which seems almost perfect (a full rack of RCBO's would actually be perfect) and considerably cheaper than Screwfix! A well thought of brand too. Thanks once again, for the tip.

I too am aghast at ticket prices these days, with the West End being particularly expensive. I had mentioned the 'best' seats priced at £99.... Last night I checked the same seats for Saturday performances, and the later dates on the run ... Same seats £125. Rather frighteningly, I'll almost guarantee every ticket will sell. If I were to pro rata those 2½ hours (at £50 an hour) for a two week holiday, I'd be budgeting £8,400 per person. Why make this comparison? Well, since my 2 week holiday (when I took one) would come in at under one tenth the £8,400 price, I can say the tickets are 10 times more expensive per hour, than a foreign holiday. This can be a useful benchmark for working out a potential value-for-money comparison, which plainly, this isn't. That said.... I currently avoid spending £600-£800 each year now, by having a stay-cation at home. Averaged out, I have one of these expensive nights, perhaps once a year. Viewed with that in mind, my 'blow-out' night is in some sense, my yearly "holiday-in-an-evening". As sad and frugal as it reads. The other glaringly obvious thing to me when I consider it, is how often do I go to the opera or have I ever been? Perhaps 8 times to date? The two notable visits were the Albert Hall gig, and a night of arias at the Barbican. These were 20 and 30 years ago respectively. No performer or promoter is getting rich off me. Subject to the gig being in Italian, I think I might be going.

1300 photo's? You wouldn't have so many if you had to use film. Going to Central America? I'll tell you what, I bet your travel insurance company loves you. Your premiums alone probably pays the yearly bonus for several of the company directors. Good luck, and of course, stay safe. Your wife is right about the sizing. I take a 12 in their trouser. I can get into a large 10 and a small 14 (I have all three.) For heels, I need a Long. The company "spec" for an L is 33 inches. I have to check each pair, and consequently carry a tape measure almost always. 32½" is typical, as is 33" obviously. 32" is about one in ten, and 34" about one in twenty. I wear my trousers/jeans around my waist, not my (non-existent) hips, so length is VERY important when it comes to hiding a heel ~ especially a slim one. Consequently, anything less than 33" in length is a no-no. Only yesterday I had to return two pairs of TU branded 'kickflare' jeans to Sainsbury, that felt really good to wear (very stretchy). Because they had a "mid rise" (that made them almost hipsters), when pulled them up to my waist - which is better for muffin top avoidance, the advantageous 34" leg became a 32½" leg. They weren't overly expensive either at £16 a pair. With a 34" leg on a trouser/jean, I can wear a 5" heel out, and the heel is usually covered. I walk like I'm wearing heels (as would a girl in shoes that high), but the cause isn't immediately obvious. As 'hipster' jeans (aka low rise, aka mid rise jeans) don't have hips to sit on when worn by men, they have a tendency to fall down. Waisted with a belt works for me anyway. Finding a style with a higher rise (aka 'classic' rise) with 34" leg and a slight flare in a stretchy jean has proved quite a task. Has literally taken years, and has culminated with M+S going back in time to make a style that would have been commonplace 10/15/20 years ago. Even then, finding 2 pairs made correctly (first batch had a left leg sewn on a curve - if you can believe it) was quite a struggle, though finding the 34" leg in that style proved less of a problem for some reason. Almost every other pair of 12L's had a 34" leg, the main problem was finding pairs with straight left legs. I must have looked at 40-50 pairs to find potential purchases over a period of months, and bought/tried on at home, around 8 pairs before deciding to keep the ones I have. (And one of those two pairs has a slight manufacturing fault on the hem.)

Why did we wait? Age? (Getting cranky ~ 'detached' ~ 'unconcerned'?) <tick> Lack of confidence? (Not in my case, never been a problem - apparently.) Or access to forums/social media where like-minded people allow a sense of community/normalisation? <tick>

Oopsy... Returned the leather courts tonight, and am keeping the patent ones. I have NO IDEA where I might wear them, but I want to keep them for a while anyway. They will sell on an auction site if I get fed up with looking at them/trying them on (never gonna happen). I justified keeping the patent shoes by deciding to sell on the Zara courts mentioned.

I am no opera fan/buff either, but I like quite a lot of the work from Puccini. I have seen La Bohème several times, only because it is popular. I've seen Turandot, not Tosca, and Madam Butterfly twice (at least) and the last time in English (yeuk.) I've mentioned the farce of the Albert Hall version several times .... It's another aspect putting me off the £100 ticket. I'm hoping the web site has it wrong, and the production is anything BUT English. I'm not interested in the dubious prose (aka lyrics), only the melody, and the drama from the operatic performance. Hearing the poorly constructed "lyrics" translated to English and made to fit the melody is very unsatisfying. I'd rather not, even if the gig was free but in English, I would be absent from the performance. I'd trawled You Tube for some samples, but the sound quality is so poor (singers typically not miked up very well), so have not added any links. What sort of people do I expect to see at a London Opera production? Tourists mostly. Locals, I would expect to be: flamboyant, wealthy, artistic. (Or am I thinking of the singers? ) If I've paid £100 for a ticket, I'll wear what I please, I've paid for the right. That said, I'm quite sure, a man in heels will garner more unwanted attention, than a man dressed as a woman (assuming the ladies costume doesn't involve rubber or whips). When I went to a gig in courts before, they were quite discreet. I still got noticed by one or two, but that is quite usual even if I wear boots. Not sure why I like the idea of wearing red patent. As outrageous as I could get? Though the idea is to have 80% of then hidden.

That's very kind of you to say. I'm wondering what the shape of the person might be, who would fit the Zara PU Large.... 34" waist, no backside, and very skinny legs for their torso size? I hope I don't meet them. Had another look in an M+S store tonight for the elusive 12L. Found a 14L (so far found to be too big) and a 10L which tempted me ... but stayed in the store. I have some photographs done already, that will probably the last in this series. I have settled on a 14R in the absence of an alternative. I just need to edit them before posting, which is never a 2 minute job.

Well done! 2½ inches/6cm is a good height to using for walking everywhere. Not too high to affect your walking style (gait) too much, so it would be realist to imagine you aren't noticed wearing them in a social setting, though some might notice you are taller? If you want encouragement to wear those boots in a work environment, perhaps you should show us how you wear them?

Interesting. I prefer, by some margin, black leather. I quite like patent, but it tends to be a little stiff for practical (wearing) purposes, though I remember my father having some patent leather dancing shoes that felt supple as silk. Trouble with shining up leather over a period of time, is that eventually it takes on a feminine 'shine' not unlike that found with very cheap PU shoes. A long time ago, when I was more interested in being a 'fashion victim', I owned a light coloured pair of buckskin shoes. The skin was very much like suede but even smoother to the touch. Thinking about it, they felt very much touching human skin.... I had the very devil of a time keeping them ship-shape and that may well have tainted my taste for anything other than leather which is relatively easy to keep clean. I've always liked 'shiny' for its visual appeal, both aesthetic and biological. People who wear shiny, indicate a tendency to be a little wayward? An attractive attribute to a young man full of hormones. Possibly it's something else that has stuck. I have mentioned elsewhere my desire to go see Madam Butterfly next year. I would really like to be wearing a rather brassy pair of red patent stiletto courts at the venue. This is a shoe I don't own BTW, so an unlikely situation on several levels. (Ticket price being the significant one.) The web site indicating it's going to be done in English with sub-titles projected somewhere, also being a stopper. I want to listen to the opera in the native Italian I don't understand, thank you very much.

He was (miss) quoted as only fitting metal, I mentioned, I'm being offered a 15 way plastic CU to be fitted next week. His employers are the ones who get him to only fit metal ones to keep prospective pedantic inspectors happy. My mate with the electrical wholesalers tells me Screwfix are the only outlet he knows of that even has (limited) stock of plastic CU's, and then only because they bought up MK's residual stock at favourable prices. He sold out of all his 'plastic' stock some months ago.

Right, took some digging, but here is the answer ..... Originally, the change was supposed to be implemented as of July 1st 2015, but a shortage of the metal cased CU's meant an interim delay was permitted until Jan 1st 2016. Not all Building Inspectors (if I have the right role) are happy about the 'delay' and it's not unknown for one to insist a metal CU is installed as appropriate to the drawings which would have been specified on any post July 1st 2015 build/installation. I have on offer a 15 way plastic (MK probably) CU, at an undisclosed price. I'm thinking this is a bit of over-kill for 6 circuits...