Originally Posted by andrew22

wearing heels just reminds men of when women used to have a huge thumb thing on their foot. (when we were monkeys) That is why it is liked. lool

Footwear with heels used to be associated with wealth and power. They originated from powerful men who were often soldiers and rode horses. Heels made it easier to keep the foot in the stirrup. Eventually these powerful people would pay for elegant and expensive heeled shoes, and in the 1500's-1600's the term "well heeled" was associated with power, class and wealth. Both men and women would wear heels in the court because it was a sign of power.

Fast-forward to today, and women wear high heels mostly because:

• they change the angle of the foot with respect to the lower leg, which accentuates the appearance of calves
• they change the wearer's posture, requiring a more upright carriage and altering the gait in what is considered a seductive fashion
• they make the wearer appear taller
• they make the legs appear longer
• they make the foot appear smaller
• they make the toes appear shorter
• they make the arches of the feet higher and better defined
• they make the lower leg muscles more defined
• they make the gluteus maximus more defined

You can read about it on wikipedia and other sources, but generally speaking in modern times they make women look more fit, and in shape by accentuating features men already find attractive, like making long legs look longer, and making feet look smaller.

I tried looking for evolutionary links to high heels (to which you were referring to) but I couldn't find any.

Originally Posted by Jay

I'm pretty sure that it's the method of suicide that leads to higher suicide rates. Females have more suicide attempts, but they use methods like overdosing which usually just leads to liver/brain damage. Typically when you shoot yourself in the head it's more likely to be fatal.

Speaking with the researchers who participated in the conference, this does appear to be the case. Males are more likely to successfully complete an attempt than females. That said, recent suicides and attempts at McMaster have been overwhelmingly female.

The researchers are hoping to conduct in-depth studies of male suicides and mental health to determine factors and create more effective prevention programs.

Originally Posted by Taunton

Footwear with heels used to be associated with wealth and power. They originated from powerful men who were often soldiers and rode horses. Heels made it easier to keep the foot in the stirrup. Eventually these powerful people would pay for elegant and expensive heeled shoes, and in the 1500's-1600's the term "well heeled" was associated with power, class and wealth. Both men and women would wear heels in the court because it was a sign of power.

Fast-forward to today, and women wear high heels mostly because:

• they change the angle of the foot with respect to the lower leg, which accentuates the appearance of calves
• they change the wearer's posture, requiring a more upright carriage and altering the gait in what is considered a seductive fashion
• they make the wearer appear taller
• they make the legs appear longer
• they make the foot appear smaller
• they make the toes appear shorter
• they make the arches of the feet higher and better defined
• they make the lower leg muscles more defined
• they make the gluteus maximus more defined

You can read about it on wikipedia and other sources, but generally speaking in modern times they make women look more fit, and in shape by accentuating features men already find attractive, like making long legs look longer, and making feet look smaller.

I tried looking for evolutionary links to high heels (to which you were referring to) but I couldn't find any.

tl;dr: they make a girl's legs and ass look better

If you asked anyone well-versed in the anatomy of the lower body (hips and legs), they'd probably tell you that wearing heels is more an example of natural selection than evolution.

I'm tired, but hopefully you get the joke I'm trying to make.

To Bushra: Dress pants are designed to be worn with socks...and socks aren't designed to be worn with heels. Aren't heels (in a business outfit at least) worn with pantyhose?

Those definitely don't work with dress pants.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

Aren't heels (in a business outfit at least) worn with pantyhose?

Those definitely don't work with dress pants.

That's what knee-high hose or trouser socks (I think that's what they're called...they're about as high as normal socks, but made out of hosiery) are for!

Originally Posted by Souldier

tl;dr: they make a girl's legs and ass look better

Aside from those considerations, whether they are correct or not, I want to point out something about the use of heels that you might not have considered.

In my third-year Women and Politics course, discussion arose regarding the hijab and burqua, and whether they were true symbols of women's oppression or liberation. A good friend of mine pointed out that individuals from other cultures, when looking at North America, must wonder why our sociocultural norms recommend that, in order to promote beauty, femininity, and liberation, women wear shoes that make it more difficult to walk.

Originally Posted by lorend

That's what knee-high hose or trouser socks (I think that's what they're called...they're about as high as normal socks, but made out of hosiery) are for!

Ok, so we've verified I'm not a woman. :p lol

But we're really beating around the bush here: I brought up the fact because I don't think the fact that some women like to wear a skirt/heels is oppressive in this day and age. Cheri's got my back! Haha

Originally Posted by Naheed

A good friend of mine pointed out that individuals from other cultures, when looking at North America, must wonder why our sociocultural norms recommend that, in order to promote beauty, femininity, and liberation, women wear shoes that make it more difficult to walk.

But this in particular, is more a (still interesting) question about cultural studies, not gender studies. An individual from this culture probably wonders why women from such a hot climate would wear something like a burqua which inevitably exacerbates an issue such as heat.

Why do people in the west think showing cleavage is sexy, and thus desirable, while people from the east think hiding everything is mysterious and desirable? (This is more an issue of culture)


The underlying question relating to gender is, how come women have to subject themselves to being uncomfortable, in order to be designated 'attractive?' This seems to be a common theme.

Originally Posted by Jay

I'm pretty sure that it's the method of suicide that leads to higher suicide rates. Females have more suicide attempts, but they use methods like overdosing which usually just leads to liver/brain damage. Typically when you shoot yourself in the head it's more likely to be fatal.

This is an interesting issue in and of itself which could certainly be studied in a gender studies sort of course. Why do you think women use less effective methods?

When discussing this issue with a friend a few years ago, I'd hypothesized the following: a lot of times men want suicide as a means to end their life. Typically however, women use suicide as a means for change (perhaps subconsciously). They feel as though they're so upset that they can't go on living as they're currently living, and attempt something so drastic that it will guarantee change...either through death itself, should they be successful, or by gaining sympathy and support from those around them. The punchline: They're banking on the 2nd option.

I don't know if there's any validity to this hypothesis, and it's in general quite difficult to verify anything like this beyond mere speculation... But it feels like it might be something that makes sense.

Originally Posted by Naheed

in order to promote beauty, femininity, and liberation, women wear shoes that make it more difficult to walk.

I was thinking about this yesterday when I saw this thread and wrote up my little piece, and (typically I think) I used a biological form of reasoning:

Women wear the things they do because they make themselves look more attractive to men. The ultimate goal of life, at least from a biological standpoint, is to procreate and so women want to attract men ultimately for this purpose. Men are strongly motivated by what they see, so looking good is a great way to attract them.

Now consider what men do to attract women:

Women seek a man who can take care of a family, provide resources and protect them. This is why men seek various forms of power. Things like getting a great job, being physically fit, and making lots of money are what men try to do in order to attract women. While this may not be universally the case (generalizing cannot explain everything), this does explain why we see women with unattractive douchebag men: they have great jobs, lots of money, are physically fit, or some combination which makes them seem suitable for mating.

My question is: why do people have a problem with what women do to attract men (wear uncomfortable and restrictive clothing), and not have a problem with what men do to attract women (gain power). Also, this doesn't mean women can't be powerful, it just means that a woman with priorities aligned with her biology is more likely to seek a man to provide for a family as opposed to attempting to become powerful herself.

tl;dr: women wear uncomfortable clothes to attract men; men gain power to attract women.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

This is an interesting issue in and of itself which could certainly be studied in a gender studies sort of course. Why do you think women use less effective methods?

When discussing this issue with a friend a few years ago, I'd hypothesized the following: a lot of times men want suicide as a means to end their life. Typically however, women use suicide as a means for change (perhaps subconsciously). They feel as though they're so upset that they can't go on living as they're currently living, and attempt something so drastic that it will guarantee change...either through death itself, should they be successful, or by gaining sympathy and support from those around them. The punchline: They're banking on the 2nd option.

I don't know if there's any validity to this hypothesis, and it's in general quite difficult to verify anything like this beyond mere speculation... But it feels like it might be something that makes sense.

It was in my abnormal psychology textbook about on a chapter about suicide. I ended up selling it.

You're right as to the reason to why men complete suicide and women typically attempt but do not complete suicide. Not all individuals who have suicide attempts actually want to kill themselves. I remember reading something about a suicide attempt being a subconscious method of getting more attention.

That's not to say that the individuals who try to commit suicide and threaten to commit suicide shouldn't be taken seriously.

I tried looking for evolutionary links to high heels (to which you were referring to) but I couldn't find any.

That's because high heels, like birth control pills, are more of a proximal factor rather than a distal (evolutionary) factor. Compared to how long human (and human ancestors) have actually been in existence, high heels have only been present for a relatively small amount of time. Half a million years ago, a woman who wore silly shoes that prevented them from running away from predators would probably get eaten before she could reproduce. The handicap hypothesis mostly applies to men anyways.

So while high heels, help to enhance traits that men find attractive from an evolutionary perspective. The fact that high heels are relatively new in evolutionary history might be why you didn't find anything.

Edit: If you're interested in this stuff, I'm sure Dr. J. Ostovich probably has a better explanation regarding distal versus proximal causation.

Okay, a few things.

1) women's studies classes are controlled heavily by professors. Some are very angry, some don't know how to solve problems constructively, some haven't changed their strategies in 35 years, etc. These professors end up leaving a sour taste in the mouth of some, and giving others a skill set that will ill serve them to deal with gender issues. I have seen more people involved in women's studies like this then I can count, and it pisses me off. They make it terribly hard for people who are productive, positive, and a good influence on the world do their work. Some professors kick ass; no better way to put it. Other dont. It typically has little to do with the subject matter, these are more personal faults in the individual than anything. Some dont even realize how their actions can affect impressionable students who don't go past the arguments presented in class to form their own opinions. This is why women's studies gets a bad reputation. That and some of the material can be really sexist, focus on a dual gender system, and work under mistaken assumptions.

2) In a sexist system, EVERYONE suffers. Now people will flame me saying men dont suffer when they have power, but that just shows how little you understand about the topic. There are stresses imposed on everyone when you are forced into gender roles. Stories are always more complex then a flame ridden 30 word forum reply would suggest. Being forced into a position of power or bondage is still forced. The suffering is not measurable, nor equal (despite not being measurable), but it is still suffering, and is one of many variables in a gigantic equation.

3)Men's studies can cover all the same topics women's studies can, but ideally courses would look at specific topics and cover several viewpoints(not just men vs. women). I think having a men's studies to balance out the scale doesnt really deal with the larger issues involved, mainly that there are more then two genders. Anyway you look at it, you get to the point where you get into grey areas with new subgroups, and it becomes useless to use a two group system.



4) Rossclot wears dresses. Yes I do (although I didnt bring any to mac, I dont think). When it gets hot, and shorts can no longer satisfy me, I will throw on a dress. Thin breathable fabric, no extra material between the legs to trap in heat, a wonderful breeze, of course I would wear a dress. Do I get dirty looks? Sure. Do people think that the dress is an indication of my sexual orientation? Usually. Do I get dumb comments from just about everyone? Yes. But am I physically comfortable? Hell yes. Function before all else. I dont care nearly as much about gender rules as just about everyone else does.

Look up:
Dhoti
Kilts
Lungi
Kanga

I would be wearing one right now if I had it. In fact, this thread has rejuvenated my search for some, and now that I am back in Ontario I should be able to get one. HeeHaw HeeHaw!


oh yeah and this doesn't even address why men cant wear frilly Sunday dresses, I am just saying men wearing dresses already happens around the world.

Originally Posted by Rossclot

2) In a sexist system, EVERYONE suffers. Now people will flame me saying men dont suffer when they have power, but that just shows how little you understand about the topic. There are stresses imposed on everyone when you are forced into gender roles. Stories are always more complex then a flame ridden 30 word forum reply would suggest. Being forced into a position of power or bondage is still forced. The suffering is not measurable, nor equal (despite not being measurable), but it is still suffering, and is one of many variables in a gigantic equation.

oh yeah and this doesn't even address why men cant wear frilly Sunday dresses, I am just saying men wearing dresses already happens around the world.

word. it's like guys in asia/europe carrying murses. it's normal, but if a guy were to carry around a purse here it's like blasphemy.

also, i swear to god, every time i first meet a girl, they always make some sort of rude comment about how skinny i am. yeah, i'm skinny so what? does it make me less of a guy simply because i'm not jacked?

Originally Posted by TTHX

word. it's like guys in asia/europe carrying murses. it's normal, but if a guy were to carry around a purse here it's like blasphemy.

also, i swear to god, every time i first meet a girl, they always make some sort of rude comment about how skinny i am. yeah, i'm skinny so what? does it make me less of a guy simply because i'm not jacked?

No, it's simple. People are retards and like to point out the obvious as if no one's ever said it to you before.

ie: "omg cheri, you are like, SO SHORT."

/facepalm

You're SO TALL.

HEY IT'S BIG DAN MY MAN.