How To Let Your Friends And Family Know U Wear High Heels

[FastFreddy2]

6 minutes ago, Shyheels said:

Whatever year marker you want to out on it, I do think the arrival of stilettos ushered in a (literally) heightened sense of glamour 

That might well be true, but generally, a high stiletto would not have been as common as 2 or 3 inch one. Sure higher was available, but not generally worn. I was about then, and I had an interest from about the age of 5 or 6. Can't confirm the age of this picture immediately but you get the idea...

 

Heels this high would have been considered "fetish", at best.  

 

[FastFreddy2]

I have tried to use Google to find images, but obviously they must have a share in Pinterest because just about every image I'm offered, comes from them. I'm not and don't want to be a 'member' of some forwarding robot, so I'm struggling to get images of the era I'm trying to reproduce. 

[Shyheels]

Stilettos were pretty early - 1954? Maybe a bit earlier. I realise they were lower than we would see these days, but the sharpness and pettiness of them made them distinct and chic and edgy and set fashion down an interesting new path.

Anything much over 120mm on a female sized shoe looks too high and misproportioned in my view

Edited August 13, 2017 by Shyheels

[FastFreddy2]

[FastFreddy2]

 

Gene Tierney in a stunning off the shoulder red dress -1948.

[FastFreddy2]

New York Style in 1954 – by photographer Nina Leen

[Puffer]

23 minutes ago, FastFreddy2 said:

I think you need to re-read my post? MY fav period was late 40's to early 50's, which would have included anything from around 1946 upto around 1954, but I did not specify stiletto's anyway - only heels. Your fav period can be the later years if you have chosen them to be.  

The picture shown in my post and yours, is a modern copy of a style. Those shoes look like a fairly modern product.

 

9 minutes ago, FastFreddy2 said:

That might well be true, but generally, a high stiletto would not have been as common as 2 or 3 inch one. Sure higher was available, but not generally worn. I was about then, and I had an interest from about the age of 5 or 6. Can't confirm the age of this picture immediately but you get the idea...

Heels this high would have been considered "fetish", at best.  

 

 

2 minutes ago, Shyheels said:

Stilettos were pretty early - 1954? Maybe a bit earlier. I realise they were lower than we would see these days, but the sharpness and pettiness of them made them distinct and chic and edgy and set fashion down an interesting new path.

I realised, Freddy, that you were referring to heels in general in quoting the 1946 - 54 period, but the implication you gave was that the overall look you described did not survive that period, as of course it did.   We both acknowledge the 1946-7 start and I feel that the 'rock-and-roll' era (your preferred look PLUS stilettos) had everything you described and more.   I agree that your pic shows 'repro' fashion - those shoes are indeed too modern; platforms disappeared when stilettos came in and did not reappear (in combination with true stilettos) until the mid-70s.

Stilettos emerged in the early 50s - the precise date (and indeed who introduced them) is not something I can be precise about.   Initially, they were generally quite low (3" max) and with rounded or open toes, but as the fashion caught on they got higher and usually more pointed.   By about 1958-9 true stilettos (slim and properly positioned) of anything up to 4.5" were commonplace, with even higher (5") emerging in around 1960-62.   Yes, a 3 - 3.5" heel was very common (and some women never rose above the even lower 'kitten' heels), but 4 - 5" were by no means rare for everyday wear to and at work.   I was commuting by train from 1960 and regularly saw women (of all ages) in 4" and higher heels doing the same - an indelible impression to this day.

  

[FastFreddy2]

1 minute ago, Puffer said:

I was commuting by train from 1960 and regularly saw women (of all ages) in 4" and higher heels doing the same - an indelible impression to this day.  

I wouldn't have been out of short trousers at that time, and 'well travelled', I wasn't. While I will agree that a fairly high stiletto (4" or more on a size 5 or 6 shoe) would be the very epitome of 'the look', my fav is the slim build, nipped in waist and constricting long pencil skirt. As seen in the Time images above. Seamed fully fashioned stockings, evidence of the suspender clips showing through the tight skirt and a high heel, all doing  their bit to enhance the look. A bit of mascara, and red lipstick .... (I may need to lie down again. )

 

During my rather frustrating search for images, I have discovered one that looked perfect, but dated 1960 - I think. That doesn't mean the outfit was from that date, though it does rather seem the style I like lasted longer than I thought. That said, the outfit was on an actress, and it could have been an image from a film, set in an earlier time.  Where is a Vogue expert when you need one?

[Puffer]

The 'Bettie Page' pic above is almost certainly no later than about 1950, unless she was intentionally re-creating that period later on.   Intended to be fetish, but pretty tame by current standards.   The 'Oh so 1950' pics are bang-on for that period.  

This pic (from Getty archive) allegedly shows a Dior 'New Look' model, which suggests 1947 or very soon after.   But I wonder - the shoes look more mid-50s to me:

This is perhaps more typical of 1947, at least in 'glamour wear':

But neither pic shows the pencil skirt which became increasingly common.

[FastFreddy2]

11 minutes ago, Puffer said:

But neither pic shows the pencil skirt which became increasingly common.

 

 

Cover, March 1948.

 

The late forties gave us the 'nipped in waist'. It carried on throughout the fifties, which as you rightly say, gave us the pencil skirt - which to my mind was always calf length. What the modern retailers would describe as a "fitted midi skirt". (I am shaking my head as I write.) During both periods, a 20-22 inch waist was common. Even in my time, a girl with a 25/26 inch waist was considered overweight. At the time, mine would have been 26/27/28" and I seldom found 'thick waisted' girls attractive.  

Edited August 13, 2017 by FastFreddy2

[Puffer]

3 minutes ago, FastFreddy2 said:

I wouldn't have been out of short trousers at that time, and 'well travelled', I wasn't. While I will agree that a fairly high stiletto (4" or more on a size 5 or 6 shoe) would be the very epitome of 'the look', my fav is the slim build, nipped in waist and constricting long pencil skirt. As seen in the Time images above. Seamed fully fashioned stockings, evidence of the suspender clips showing through the tight skirt and a high heel, all doing  their bit to enhance the look. A bit of mascara, and red lipstick .... (I may need to lie down again. )

...

I agree completely about the allure of that overall look you describe; the shoes are a bonus although the heel height is less important than the fact that it is a stiletto and the toe is pointed.   I think we can also agree however that the 'look' pre-stiletto, although still very attractive and very fashionable at the time, was literally taken to new heights when a stiletto was added - 'an interesting new path' as Shyheels comments, albeit modestly.    Seeing a woman in a tight skirt and 4"+ heels climbing onto a bus platform was a wonder to perceive.

[Puffer]

2 minutes ago, FastFreddy2 said:

The late forties gave us the 'nipped in waist'. It carried on throughout the fifties, which as you rightly say, gave us the pencil skirt - which to my mind was always calf length. What the modern retailers would describe as a "fitted midi skirt". (I am shaking my head as I write.) During both periods, a 20-22 inch waist was common. Even in my time, a girl with a 25/26 inch waist was considered overweight. At the time, mine would have been 26/27/28" and I seldom found 'thick waisted' girls attractive.  

I should have added that the pencil skirt, in addition to becoming increasingly popular, also became shorter until the 1960-ish style was (at least for younger women) most often just on or above the knee; the calf-length skirt was limited to older women and formal wear.   With a rear slit (for some ease of movement), these shorter tight skirts could easily give a glimpse of stocking top and suspender ...

Now I need a lie down, in a darkened room, so goodnight to all...

[FastFreddy2]

24 minutes ago, Puffer said:

I should have added that the pencil skirt, in addition to becoming increasingly popular, also became shorter until the 1960-ish style was (at least for younger women) most often just on or above the knee; the calf-length skirt was limited to older women and formal wear.   With a rear slit (for some ease of movement), these shorter tight skirts could easily give a glimpse of stocking top and suspender ...

Now I need a lie down, in a darkened room, so goodnight to all...

Slits in a pencil skirt are as attractive to me, as a platform on shoes.

Might be different if there was a glimpse of stocking on offer, but not in my time. (Unless a girlfriend had decided to have her evil way with my body.) Here is a very modern take on the longer, truly pencil style:

 

 

 

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by FastFreddy2

[Shyheels]

7 hours ago, FastFreddy2 said:

 

 

Cover, March 1948.

 

The late forties gave us the 'nipped in waist'. It carried on throughout the fifties, which as you rightly say, gave us the pencil skirt - which to my mind was always calf length. What the modern retailers would describe as a "fitted midi skirt". (I am shaking my head as I write.) During both periods, a 20-22 inch waist was common. Even in my time, a girl with a 25/26 inch waist was considered overweight. At the time, mine would have been 26/27/28" and I seldom found 'thick waisted' girls attractive.  

I love the old Vogue cover. This was the era when my mother was modelling and I can recall seeing pictures of her wearing outfits just such as this. She had closets full of clothes from this era and the early/mid fifties, given to her during her modelling days, and since many of them were timeless - or timeless within the period we were talking about - she would wear them on occasion when she was dressing up. I remember the gloves, the hats and the skirts but for the life of me I cannot picture the shoes or heels that went with these outfits. She certainly wore heels - although much, much, much less frequently as she grew older. We were also living full-time back in the family's old New England farmhouse in the backwoods by the time I was in my very early teens and there was precisely zero call for wearing heels

I don't know if she ever wore stilettos. Can't recall. She had funny name for them which I have forgotten, other than that it was funny. I think it was said with affection though.     

Edited August 14, 2017 by Shyheels

[Shyheels]

6 hours ago, FastFreddy2 said:

Slits in a pencil skirt are as attractive to me, as a platform on shoes.

Might be different if there was a glimpse of stocking on offer, but not in my time. (Unless a girlfriend had decided to have her evil way with my body.) Here is a very modern take on the longer, truly pencil style:

 

 

 

 

A very modern take, as you say, on a classic style. I like it.

 

[Puffer]

We have certainly opened up a big subject here; there is much to be found (and enjoyed).   A brief dip into the archives reveals some c1960 pics which show the prevailing fashion, albeit with lower heels and wider skirts than we might prefer, although I find a longish A-line skirt, possibly pleated, also very appealing.   The first is obviously a fashion parade and rather too chic for everyday street wear.   The second is more typical of 'office worker' daywear - and the absence of hats reminds me that hairstyles were an important component of the overall look too: ideally a beehive or anything worn 'up' imho.   The third pic (New York 1961) is very typical of street fashion, although the girls' expressions are not too encouraging.

 

And Sarah (of Rosa Shoes) captures much of 'the look' well in this contemporary view:

 

Finally, this link to some archive video for the 50's:

http://fashionthroughtheyears.weebly.com/1950-1959.html

 

[Tacchi Alti]

I have a theory that a lot of today's male heel wearers were growing up during the time of unisex clothes and shoes. I was a teenager when flares and platforms were in - most boys wore heels of some sort, and some of the girls wore delightful high heels - not just clumpy platforms. Perhaps my love for wedges stems from that, but a couple of girls used to walk to school in very high stilettos. It always made my tongue hang out and made me wobble on my bike... I've always pined for those days. For some reason the male heels have never come back although a lot of female fashions have been revived over the intervening period.

[Shyheels]

2 hours ago, Russ in boots said:

I have a theory that a lot of today's male heel wearers were growing up during the time of unisex clothes and shoes. I was a teenager when flares and platforms were in - most boys wore heels of some sort, and some of the girls wore delightful high heels - not just clumpy platforms. Perhaps my love for wedges stems from that, but a couple of girls used to walk to school in very high stilettos. It always made my tongue hang out and made me wobble on my bike... I've always pined for those days. For some reason the male heels have never come back although a lot of female fashions have been revived over the intervening period.

I suspect you are correct. Certainly the late 60s and early 70s were very fluid and groundbreaking in terms of fashion, style and colours. I was certainly into flares, Jesus shirts, paisley and bandanas although I never wore platforms. Then, as now, I thought they were clumpy and disliked them. I do not really recall much about heels. What I do remember from that era, and which caught my eye at the time were girls in white go-go boots. For the life of me I can't recall if they had heels or not. I think they were just low 'normal' heels. I recall a very pretty red haired girl in my eighth grade class who wore go-go boots nearly every day, as did a couple of her friends. But her I remember in particular. I thought she was very pretty. And she was certainly very nice. I liked her boots very much too - and I wished I could have a pair just like them

This may sound odd, but I was a daydreamy kid with my head in the clouds and in those fairly unisex days I did not grasp straight away that these boots were strictly girls only - I mean, I knew that girls wore them, and I hadn't seen any on guys, but I did not grasp the strength of the taboo, not straight away at any rate, and so I very nearly came out asked for a pair for myself! Something or somebody clued me in - I forget what or how - and I was mortified to find I had been fancying boots that were strictly for girls. I felt as alarmed and embarrassed as if I had been inadvertently wanting to wear a dress.

Indeed I was so mortified that I buried this new discovered and unnerving partiality for what society deems to be "feminine" boots for decades. In that time my tastes evolved away from go-go boots to more elegant knee and otk suede boots, riding style, no heels to speak of. It was not an obsession, but when the autumn styles would come out and tall boots would feature once more in display windows and advertisements I would give a sigh and wish that it were possible for men to adopt the style.

[Puffer]

8 hours ago, Russ in boots said:

I have a theory that a lot of today's male heel wearers were growing up during the time of unisex clothes and shoes. I was a teenager when flares and platforms were in - most boys wore heels of some sort, and some of the girls wore delightful high heels - not just clumpy platforms. Perhaps my love for wedges stems from that, but a couple of girls used to walk to school in very high stilettos. It always made my tongue hang out and made me wobble on my bike... I've always pined for those days. For some reason the male heels have never come back although a lot of female fashions have been revived over the intervening period.

In the sense of 'being there', yes; of course many of today's male heel wearers were growing up (as far as teenagers ever do!) during the late 60s - mid 70s, when flower power merged into flares and platforms and then into new romantics etc - all prevailing fashions with a strong unisex bias (and appeal, to some).   I can't agree however that 'most boys wore heels of some sort' during at least part of that period.   From personal observation, very few young men (say 14 - 30) wore anything higher than a slightly raised heel (say 1.5", common on 'ordinary' shoes then, as was a slightly thicker sole) and 'proper' platforms and stacked heels were definitely a minority interest, except perhaps for special social occasions such as clubbing.   (Thank goodness!  I disliked platforms then (on either sex) and continue to do so.)   I think that men's cuban heels were probably more popular in the early 60s than were any 'high heels' subsequently produced for men, and even then they were not worn by anything like the majority.   And cuban heels (unlike any other male high heels, with or without platforms) have enjoyed a limited revival too in recent years - I wear them now but was never a heel wearer in the 60s.

I'm surprised if you found many schoolgirls (or other females) in high stilettos after about 1966 - they were still seen, but increasingly rare on any fashion-conscious teenager until the revival began (initially with a platform too) in the mid-70s.   High heels were certainly re-emerging in the early 70s (after years of low and flat 'dolly shoes') but they were not initially slim stilettos and much like the chunkier styles now again being promoted as 'trendy'.

[Shyheels]

Manolo Blahnik revived the stiletto around 1974 after it had called from fashion during the mid 60s. It was Roger Vivier who created the first true modern stiletto in 1954. It has ebbed and flowed a lot in the past 60-odd years. According to an article I saw in the Guardian the other day, stilettos are coming back in a big way now.

[euchrid]

1 hour ago, Shyheels said:

Manolo Blahnik revived the stiletto around 1974 after it had called from fashion during the mid 60s. It was Roger Vivier who created the first true modern stiletto in 1954. It has ebbed and flowed a lot in the past 60-odd years. According to an article I saw in the Guardian the other day, stilettos are coming back in a big way now.

This article???

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2017/jul/18/heel-appeal-how-sexy-shoe-became-new-status-quo

[FastFreddy2]

11 hours ago, Shyheels said:

I do not really recall much about heels. What I do remember from that era, and which caught my eye at the time were girls in white go-go boots. For the life of me I can't recall if they had heels or not. I think they were just low 'normal' heels. I recall a very pretty red haired girl in my eighth grade class who wore go-go boots nearly every day, as did a couple of her friends. But her I remember in particular. I thought she was very pretty. And she was certainly very nice. I liked her boots very much too - and I wished I could have a pair just like them

Wearing my amateur psychologist head, I'm going to suggest a couple things about this, that may well mimic my own experience and beliefs. 

1. Pretty girl (crush) and boots were imprinted. I believe you see the two as one, and the feeling about this was (and is) so strong, it likely can never be broken, assuming there was/is any interest in disassociating the two.

2. Feelings (guilt/embarrassment/sexual stimulus) about wanting something unobtainable - out of reach - seldom vaporise. Rather, they are sometimes nurtured to the point (previous) social inhibition no longer applies.

3. People (everyone) likes to intellectualise or seeks to intellectualise fundamental human behaviour, learned over 10,000 years of DNA succession. While you wanted the girl and you could not have, you could have the boots. (Transference.) Your initial primal urge was deflected to something, that at least had some potential to satisfy a primal desire.   

 

4 hours ago, Shyheels said:

Manolo Blahnik revived the stiletto around 1974 after it had called from fashion during the mid 60s. It was Roger Vivier who created the first true modern stiletto in 1954. It has ebbed and flowed a lot in the past 60-odd years. According to an article I saw in the Guardian the other day, stilettos are coming back in a big way now.

Vertiginous heels have been with us for well over 10 years. Louboutin has become staggeringly wealthy by producing them and then protecting his brand in the courts. For the past year to 18 months, block heels were the thing, and still are -ish. What was Taylor Swift wearing in court today? High black block-heeled boots. 

I won't deny that high stiletto heels aren't still popular, but flat shoes have had in-roads this summer .... "Barely there" sandals are still popular, and to avoid feet looking like flippers, they have to come with a high heel. But this is all old news. There are two things I don't understand about the consumers continued interest in 'barely there' styles. Firstly, why so popular when so many people (women) have ugly feet? The other is that this style is inherently uncomfortable. Thin straps on a high heeled shoe have got to cut into skin after a short length of time. But retailers still promote the sales in these styles, and they would only do that if there was a market demand for them.

Edited August 15, 2017 by FastFreddy2

[wetboot]

On ‎8‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 6:22 AM, Russ in boots said:

Well, a first for me this morning... Our number two son turned up last night, about two hours before we expected him, and I took my heels off quick. (The same son I mentioned in an earlier post.) This morning I was determined his presence wouldn't make any difference to our household arrangements, so I put my 'work' heels on before leaving the house. I'm almost sure he saw them - he probably noticed my difference in height, if nothing else. He didn't comment, though. I'll be interested to see if there are any repercussions - I don't think he'd mention it on Facebook...!

Of course you are joking about your son posting on facebook...

I'm thinking your kids are aware you wear heels and are OK with it, they just don't bring it up....

[Shyheels]

6 hours ago, euchrid said:

This article???

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2017/jul/18/heel-appeal-how-sexy-shoe-became-new-status-quo

That's the one!

[Shyheels]

4 hours ago, FastFreddy2 said:

Wearing my amateur psychologist head, I'm going to suggest a couple things about this, that may well mimic my own experience and beliefs. 

1. Pretty girl (crush) and boots were imprinted. I believe you see the two as one, and the feeling about this was (and is) so strong, it likely can never be broken, assuming there was/is any interest in disassociating the two.

2. Feelings (guilt/embarrassment/sexual stimulus) about wanting something unobtainable - out of reach - seldom vaporise. Rather, they are sometimes nurtured to the point (previous) social inhibition no longer applies.

3. People (everyone) likes to intellectualise or seeks to intellectualise fundamental human behaviour, learned over 10,000 years of DNA succession. While you wanted the girl and you could not have, you could have the boots. (Transference.) Your initial primal urge was deflected to something, that at least had some potential to satisfy a primal desire.   

 

Vertiginous heels have been with us for well over 10 years. Louboutin has become staggeringly wealthy by producing them and then protecting his brand in the courts. For the past year to 18 months, block heels were the thing, and still are -ish. What was Taylor Swift wearing in court today? High black block-heeled boots. 

I won't deny that high stiletto heels aren't still popular, but flat shoes have had in-roads this summer .... "Barely there" sandals are still popular, and to avoid feet looking like flippers, they have to come with a high heel. But this is all old news. There are two things I don't understand about the consumers continued interest in 'barely there' styles. Firstly, why so popular when so many people (women) have ugly feet? The other is that this style is inherently uncomfortable. Thin straps on a high heeled shoe have got to cut into skin after a short length of time. But retailers still promote the sales in these styles, and they would only do that if there was a market demand for them.

Interesting thoughts re: pretty red-haired girl in go-go boots. 

I think it was a combination of things - firstly I really liked the look and sleekness of the boots; they were visually appealing to me. On another level I coveted the 'out there' sauciness and self-confidence they suggested, and which she possessed, and which I wished to possess too.  The fact that she was pretty and wore them certainly lent them cachet and glamour in my eyes, but I honesty believe my liking those boots, and desiring a pair myself, existed over and above and outside my fancying the girl. Because the two - boots and girl - existed together it becomes hard to unravel the thought processes and feelings, but I believe they were separate in my mind, even then. I think because there is also a sexiness in the mix, it becomes to easy to put it all down to that. Boots never became a fetish with me, but I always have liked the look and style of tall fashion boots.

As to the barely there styles - they don't do much for me either.