jra wrote:HobbitFeet wrote:Nivana wrote:Raggamuffin wrote:HobbitFeet wrote:jesus
you even have to be spiteful about women that wear glam shoes
who fucking cares what other women wear on their feet, and why they wear them
One should care. If you see a woman wearing unsuitable shoes a lot of the time, you should tell them how bad they are for their feet, before it's too late.
I was reading an article in a magazine in the Dentist the other day, about the Duchess Of Cambridge and her feet. She has all manner of bunions, and toe issues apparently. It's all from wearing high heels it seems. She still wears them though. I think some people would just carry on and not bother. Like Kate
I think that the historical patriarchal nature of our society carries much of the burden of the thought processes that lead to women abusing their feet - however it's still none of my business why and when other women wear glam shoes
except when it's NN, then I just take the piss the following day
There are plenty of men's shoes that can damage a man's feet. Fashion shoes you might call them.
Women don't hold a monopoly on wearing bad fitting shoes.
I don't recall saying they did, however they don't have to be ill-fitting to damage your feet, there are many more ways to achieve that, and as I actually said 'abusing their feet' the subject is much broader
take another historically patriarchal society and look at footbinding, all done to please men, to not only create the smallest foot possible but also to provide a shape that lends itself to male sexual relief
that is not to say men were entirely responsible for the continuation of the practice, many women insisted on binding the feet of their daughters and even as the practice began to lose favour they would argue that it was to give their daughter the best chance in life - but clearly like female circumcision it is little more than mutilation for gratification
this isn't a male v female subject, it's humane v inhumane