FastFreddy2

I have purposely avoided mentioning the store concerned as to avoid anyone/anywhere, associating my full details (which the store has) with my lifestyle choice - as in me choosing to wear high heels. As for the last two sentences in the post above, I must point out your undeniable failure to adhere to the unwritten rule on humour here. It's not allowed, and you have broken that rule TWICE in a single post. You are obviously a "liberal", despite the overtones of your 'crash for cash' scheme suggesting you might be an entrepreneurial Tory. Next, you'll be suggesting 'wimmin' should get the vote ...

During the many trips to London's West End, I have unfortunately, damaged shoes. Usually though cracks in pavements, gaps between slabs, and of course gratings. It kinda comes with the territory I suppose, unlike shopping malls where the walkways are smooth and generally bump free. Some months ago, during her first outing for months in heels, Mrs Freddy damaged a heel on an escalator. Brand new, never worn before shoes too. Two graunches up one heel. I was sick for her. Not least because it's the sort of disappointing incident that would encourage her to wear flats in future. About 4 weeks later, the same escalator did the same to a pair of my heels. I felt the 'strike' on the shoe, though I didn't spot the damage until I returned home and took the shoes off. Because of Mrs Freddy's previous incident, I had made a point of remembering the time, and exact location when I felt the 'strike'. While once could be a genuine 'accident', twice in 4 weeks (with none for any of the many previous years) suggested faulty equipment. I wrote to the store involved, and checked the equipment days later myself. Initially I got the usual "not our fault" letter, but I assured them I had evidence the escalator had a design fault, which it has. I also assured them I could use this as proof the two pairs of shoes were damaged in a way that should have been avoidable. While my claim was small, it was then settled, much to my (pleasant) surprise. While I've not gained anything in this compensation claim, I am wiser. Now I'm particularly careful when on the down ride. When the step behind rises (or the one you are on falls) the step behind moves upward and forward towards your standing position. In a flat heeled show this means nothing. If wearing a heel, that 'rising' step produces a motion that can score a high heel if the heel is positioned close enough. MOST of the stair segments have very rounded top edges, so serious damage is unlikely. In the store I made a claim to, the top edges are less rounded, and some don't seem rounded at all. So the moral to the tale is ... Keep your heel well away from the rising segment behind, on a down escalator. Some have a yellow painted line to indicate this unsafe zone, but not all do. Here endeth 'the lesson'.

During the past couple of weeks and next two, I'm busy either refurbishing a student let, or my own gaff, or trying to get to the allotment, or working in a friends garden, So I am not getting out in heels at all at the moment... Consequently, I 'gave in to temptation' and spent 4 hours digging out grout and replacing with new, wearing 5 inch heels over the weekend. With concern I might be visited by the landlord, it meant for keen hearing while I worked. I had double locked the front door, but bare floorboards mean any movement is producing an echo that can be heard for 50 yards. Meaning, someone standing at the front door could hear me walking about if they just listened. Fortunately the house next door is empty, and the landlord doesn't like visiting. I'll be there most of this week, likely painting. Doing this in a heel is useful as it increases my reach without much effort, but would be hard to explain to visitors.

Not only American, but generous with their sizing.

Steve Madden and Nine West are US brands, so no surprise the sizing is in US. I wonder if this was a case of the seller not being the wearer? I've sold some shoes and boots recently, but things are still slow. Without doing a detailed analysis, I think there are definite buying/selling waves. End of month is better, but I think there are seasonal trends too. At the end of August the summer sales are over, so people have spent on the bargains they'll wear next year. Holiday period .... I don't know there's too much cash slushing around. I've a couple of pairs of (I thought) quite nice wedge sandals from Matalan on offer at silly low prices. One pair hasn't even been "viewed" so summer is over. I did sell one of the two pairs of heel less shoes I have though. As we move into Autumn (who am I kidding - it's been Autumnal for 3-4 weeks) it'll be time to sell some of my excess boots. And maybe replace a pair or two .....

I've tried a (small) number of times to acquire something long for my legs. With 'skinny pins' I'm prone to the cold, or cold wind at least, so I've always got leggings (long-johns) on under my jeans. If it's a bit warmer and likely to be cooler later in the day, I might be tempted to wear hold-ups to keep the chill off. I've seldom got bare flesh under my jeans/trousers. When it's REALLY cold, I might have hose, thermal leggings, and double-skinned trousers on. Having a pair of wearable thigh boots that could be worn to keep my legs warm would be great. I have tried to find something suitable, but a loose fit boot wouldn't look nice, and might not be particularly effective either. I see almost every day in newspapers, pictures of skinny women wearing skin-tight boots. (See below.) They probably pay a lot of money for them, and for celebs they might even be tax deductible, certainly they will be significantly more affordable to them than they are to me. I did find something that looked suitable from a Chinese supplier, but the boot was too high for shopping expeditions, and possibly too shiny too. (They were more fetish than fashion.) For the most part, people usually struggle to find a 'shaft' large enough. In my distant past I recall well at least 3 times, the respective women I was with struggled to get boots done up, because the shaft of the boots was too slim for them. I've only known that once for myself, and that was around the ankle closure, never on the upper shaft. That would have been circa 1973/74, when 'slim' people were a lot more common than they are now. I've put on weight too, but almost nothing on my legs. The first two images are of a pair of the £25 Payless boots from circa 2008. These photographs are of a size 6 (actually came up as a size 7) that I photographed to sell on an auction site circa 2012 as they weren't getting used by their owner. I hadn't really noticed before, but .... Although these were a snug fit on the thigh with the size 7's I wore out, even these (size 6) have loose material around the ankles. This is a pair of Pleaser "Natalie". If I remember, a UK9 that were donated to me. Didn't touch my legs anywhere. Maybe had 3 - 4 inches of extra material everywhere. Pleaser possibly sell more boots to men than women, and that might be apparent in their designs. As material technology develops, I see 'stretch' leather more and more, but it comes at a price. Stretchy faux suede, or a satin are much more affordable. I'll keep looking. Maybe when the Zara boots become available, I'll get lucky? Though £139 doesn't seem that 'lucky'. Probably unaffordable boots ... (to me at least) ....... More >> here <<

You need to read the small print .... Item 1. Calf circumference is 15 inches. If 15 was the 'opening' size even I wouldn't get them on 17 inch thighs ... Item 2. Calf circumference on these is 2cm larger than my calf, and thigh is 3cm larger, assuming measurements are correct. So not waders, but loose enough to fall down. Way back in 2008, I bought the thigh boots that got me back into heels, from Payless for about £25. I didn't take them off until I wrecked them a month later. Tight all the way up my leg. A stretchy neoprene upper, but soles made of cardboard. Felt wonderful, but made to be worn in the bedroom or to a nightclub once. I walked miles in them before the soles fell apart.

PMSL.

Bah humbug.

Today, the 9th of September 2015 at around 5.30pm, the UK's current reigning Queen surpassed the previous record held by her great great grandmother Queen Victoria, for the longest reigning monarch of the British Isles. The record held by Queen Victoria was; 63 years, 7 months and 2 days. I am immensely proud to have been around to see most of Queen Elizabeth II's reign. While circa 12 years old, at school I can remember being taught a little about the monarchy, and how it related directly to each of us. I was told the first 30 years of our life, determined whether we would be known as Elizabethan or not. I'm very happy there can be no doubt I am Elizabethan. The stability the Queen has brought through the years will doubtless be underestimated for many years to come. While many see the monarchy as a waste of public money and would welcome a republic, I am sure in my mind, the upper end of the royal family provide this country with a service that is generally, far from understood. Our Queen is a well respected and well liked figurehead. Unlike most of our previous and current political leaders... Thank you ma'am.

Zara are known to come up small (usually) on their shoe sizes, by at least a half a size. I have a pair of their courts with 5 inch heels, that fit 'perfectly' as a court shoe, meaning the shoe is small enough to pretty much ensure it doesn't fall off my foot when walking. Not that I can walk in them. I'm hoping these boots come up a bit more like a US10/UK8/EU41 than say a US9/UK7/EU40 - whatever it says on the sole. If they become available in the UK, I will ensure I'll find out.

And I thought I had a lot of shoes ....

From what I've seen so far in the UK, blocks are more plentiful than stiletto's. That said ..... I've mentioned many times I would like some thigh highs. I LOVE the feeling of something tight on my legs, and obviously, I like a heel too. Trouble is, I have legs like well - something thin. My calves measure 13 inch in circumference. Most boots have a 14-16 inch circumference, so usually I would have to own a pair that looked and felt like waders ..... (Baggy on the legs.) But I have spotted something that might change that. I prefer plain black leather, these look like they are going to become available in suede ... Any port in a storm. Because of the company selling them, I'm confident they'll be slim fitting. The bad news (because there has to be some), £139 .... Were they available in leather, that wouldn't be a problem at all, but how wearable is suede for me?

Will I never learn? After some brief enquiries to a seller, I recently bought another bike off an auction site. It wasn't originally offered with carriage (although the seller regularly ships bikes) but I was immediately offered shipping on my first enquiry so I accepted the deal. While many wouldn't bother, and even I thought not to, I outlined my previous incident with a couriered bike that got damaged. "Don't worry" I was told, "it'll be suitably packed", and it was - provided the courier kept it upright. The courier didn't, as was obvious from the damage to the packing, and when unpacked, the bike inside. I have packed one bike, for shipment, ever. Not one of the group of items shipped could move or rub against another. Recently, I shipped a frame and two other bits. Again, nothing could move, nor rub. Why? Because I expect/expected/anticipated the package to be mistreated while in-transit. Both packaged groups arrived safely, though both recipients would have needed at least 30 minutes to de-protect their respective group of items. Why is it, "people" think putting a bike in a box is all they need to do, to protect it from the vagaries of poorly paid drivers employed by budget priced shipping companies? And now leave me with the grief of getting my money back - probably - after returning the bike.

You do know most of us 'regulars' aren't overly young, don't you? Meaning eyesight and hearing ain't great. Yep, deffo improvement.

At first look/use, I'd say things were improved. Meaning movement around the site seem 'slicker' and that emoticon thing was a real PITA for anyone that used them. If there's a simple/easy (checkbox) option to return the avatars back to squares, that would be better since none were originally conceived to be presented in port-holes. Plus, they seem a bit smaller? At this point the avatars are all but pointless, meaning they provide no functionality at all? It's not a life threatening issue ...

The emoticons work better too. No first line full of 'null' options. A line of pictures which were used as the forum 'header', that showed recent additions to the members gallery is no longer shown? I thought it was useful (PR) in providing an immediate identity for the forum. ie images of high heeled shoes. The changing summary line, drawing visitors - if not members.

With the upgraded site, the option to PM you has not been switched off. I know you think I'm an idiot, but as you helping yourself to moving around my Personal Messages will have informed you, I know how to use the PM function. If I say it wasn't possible - it wasn't. And new members are still not being allowed in.

Those are words that could have fallen from my mouth too. One arm, one shoulder, asymmetric hemline - all producing a hidden wince whenever I see them. One of the latest styles seen in a younger women's clothing outlets, is the short (uneven) crossover style. What would ever been the mindset of the wearer? Attractive? Flattering? Neither as far as I'm concerned..... Yeuk! (Fashion technical term.)

Sorry to have to report it, but it maybe the New Member procedure might have needed a slightly harder kick to get it going again? The fella I know to be waiting has heard nothing more, and no-one else has appeared in the 'Welcome' thread either. Just letting you know. Couldn't find an email address, and you can't be PM'd?

Mrs Freddy is very tolerant of me and my heeling activities. She is very tolerant of me in general really .... Long story short, she has always been aware of my taste for looking at girls in heels (her included), and my background in wearing them too. We had been together for well over ten years when I started wearing them again. It's not what she would prefer (which is actually me back in a suit), but she's realistic. It's too strong in me to ignore, and it means she gets to go shopping for shoes fairly often. In fact it means she gets to go shopping in large malls or shopping areas like the West End quite often. Much, much much more than any of her social circle. It's seen as a win/win really. I'm often pleasantly surprised she will hold my hand or my arm as we walk, indicating we are a couple, which is the best camouflage I know of. I also have one or two other 'ladies' that have been around (one that is still around) for heeling company when Mrs Freddy is busy or tired/working. I am lucky, and I know I am. I have to say though, given my ineptness overall, I could only ever have a long-term relationship with someone who is as tolerant as Mrs Freddy appears to be. The thing with the shoes, is another straw on a heavily laden relationship, but I help just enough (usually) to avoid disasters. It may not seem it here, but I can be quite charming when a situation calls for it. Most women I'm sure, would be very resistant. But headstrong women (anyone resembling my mother in fact) could not be part of my life if I have anything to do with it. I'm big on easy going, which suits very few of the female gender. I don't drink or gamble. I don't smoke (sorry), and other than a little/mild OCD I've no real vices. So an interest in heels is a cheap (relatively) interest with side advantages like my need to get out in the world where other people are. I almost never wear heels at home, from choice. I don't wear outdoor shoes at home, so why would I with heels? I can also put a meal together, wash/iron/decorate/repair just about anything that's worth repairing in the home ... On paper at least, I think I'm seen as an asset rather than liability. The downside for me, is that some days (Sunday) herself will buy shoes and I don't. She also has a seriously vast collection of largely unworn clothing, most of which is attractive to look at while she's wearing it. This, while I pretty much live out of a small plastic storage box as she has all the wardrobe/drawer space. These situations have been discussed before your arrival here, by (now less active) members, who looked to make progress in a similar situation. I'm fairly sure there were reports of change, though not always for the better. Euchrid, who pops in from time to time, has had some interesting experiences over the last couple of years, but these might be more comprehensively reported on HHp. I recently discovered what is for me, a new 'cyber' acronym care of a You Tube video: YOLO. You Only Live Once. I'm doing my bit to ensure I have as few death-bed regrets as possible. I'll have bucket loads I'm sure, but I'm trying to minimise them. P.S. Additional picture added above.

Went to Bluewater today, Sunday. Wore my M+S (very) pointed toe cowboy style boots. Despite one or two here saying they don't look very obvious (Puffer ) at least 2 family groups made a point of walking past me and Mrs Freddy, just to have a look at my footwear. A third group didn't so much make a point, they just noticed. Another (young) girl waiting for her mum/sister to come out of the changing room, nearly put a crease in her chest with her chin, staring at my feet. To be fair, she did stare at Mrs Freddy's shoes too.... Several other individuals noticed them, but as I was walking past them, they only got the barest of glimpses. Although Bluewater is my favourite place to shop in the whole world, it is on my banned list thanks to those responsible for hiking up the Dartford Toll to £2-50 a trip AND firing all the staff manning the tolls, I won't/don't use the crossing if I have a choice. Today I went to Kent to buy a bike advertised on an auction site as "used" but in good condition. I have a particular reason for wanting the bike, so made the 160 mile round trip passing Bluewater/using the Dartford crossings to get there. On arrival, or at least within 2 minutes of it, I knew the bike wasn't coming home with me. It had a number of undisclosed gouges out of at least one of the seat-stays. Something the idiots selling the bike thought wasn't a problem. A flat tyre isn't a problem. A rusty cable isn't a problem. A spot or two of missing paint, isn't a problem. Gouges in the thin walled aluminium tubing that supports my weight as I hack over rough terrain, IS a problem.... there were at least three of these around the same place on the drive side seat stay. To me the bike was scrap. I wasn't impressed. Had a better time at the shopping mall though. Despite the (rude) staring. So did Mrs Free who got some very well made heeled shoes for £60, reduced from the sticker price of £225. As I said to Mrs Freddy, I have/had spent too much time trying to please others, it's now time to please me. I want to wear a heel, and I'm old enough to know it's now or never. My only regret, is that I left it so late to wear them out so often. Better late than newer. Plus, the last family to walk past, that consisted of 5 or 6 people who had been sitting in the cafe where only two groups were sat - us and them with the heel of my boots in plain sight to them ..... Were so plain/unattractive, there was nothing they could say or think that could surpass my criticism of them. I'm not usually mean, but they practically walked around the whole gaff to have a look at us, and believe me when I say this .... the group looked like they hadn't married outside the family for some considerable time. As Mrs Freddy said in her (sometimes) supportive way, at least I can take my shoes off. Not that I'm an oil painting, but at least I wash my hair and my clothes occasionally, and don't look like I've spent half my life under a sun-bed.... The 'near-miss' was the first family .... I have a mate, who married a younger woman from a country where the people there have a bit of colour in their skin. This fella in the shop today, was so similar in looks and stature, for a couple of heartbeats, I thought it was him. Undecided, I saw him talk to a younger looking woman with a bit of colour to her skin (olive) before she turned around to look in my direction ..... It was the young lad with them that finally gave them away really, as my mate and his wife don't have any children together. I was quite relieved I don't mind saying. While we don't share a common social circle, he knows a lot of people, and a good few of them know me. Disaster avoided ..... So feeling relieved .... I wasn't too bothered the "word in her ear" was about my footwear. She had turned to spot me, and after mumbling something back, she nearly walked in a different direction to her partner trying to glimpse at my footwear. She stopped smiling when she realised I was watching her, watching me ... The three of them didn't stop again on their journey out of the store. One other thing (NOT heel related) ...... We often read shocking and distressing things about children in the media. When we entered the mall at Bluewater, Mrs Freddy used the loo and I stood outside. While she was absent, a fella walked past me and several other men on waiting duty, toward the car park. He had a screaming/distressed child over his shoulder, who was shouting "I want my mummy. I want my mummy. I want my mummy". Now you would think, SOMEONE would ask WTF was going on, wouldn't you? This fella had, as far as anyone could tell, walked off with someone else's child. People looked (the child was screaming quite loudly), but no-one did a thing. Well, nearly no-one. I was wearing 4½ inch heels, and quite noisy heels at that. I was loathe to move anywhere without an escort for fear of getting any more attention than I might already have .... So I was compelled to wait for Mrs Freddy ..... As soon as she re-appeared we followed what I hoped was mum and child #2 up the ramp to the car park. We walked across the car park to make sure, and she was. Dad and child #1 were sitting in the car already. (Easy to spot, large number on his white tee-shirt.) Had that not been the case, my phone and three key presses on the number 9 was my next move. Mrs Freddy usually thinks I'm nuts when I try to carry out my civic duty, but this time she was very much 'on-side'. What I can't believe, is that no-one else did anything to ensure he wasn't a kidnapper. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil, is that good men do nothing." Anon. (Attributed to Edmund Burke, but not found in his writings.)

The >> stunning << Sharon Stone.

Rihanna out in £600 Zanotti sandals ... >> here <<

Emily Ratajkowski on film promo tour day 3 >> here << Side profile of those lovely high heeled sandals from another source: All copyrights acknowledged, Reproduced for educational purposes only. (Non-profit).