Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!lanl!crs
From: crs@lanl.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Body Image, High Heels and All...
Message-ID: <25782@lanl.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 13-May-85 10:36:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: lanl.25782
Posted: Mon May 13 10:36:53 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 16-May-85 03:21:16 EDT
References: <1764@decwrl.UUCP> <26300001@uo-vax3.UUCP>
Sender: newsreader@lanl.ARPA
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 37

> Ah, yes, and having forced the wearer into high heels in which there is
> NO way to walk quietly without literally tiptoe-ing, society applies
> the double bind as usual from inside the woman's mind--she must also be
> quiet, because ladies don't stomp or call attention to themselves.
> Arrrgh!

WHOA!!!!!

WHO has forced "the wearer" into high heels?

Are we to believe that normal market forces don't work when it comes
to women's shoes?

I have been following this discussion because I have my *own* low
opinion of the shoe designer's mentality but I have noticed several
postings that implied (or said outright) that the atrocities that are
sold as women's shoes are the result of a *male conspiracy*.  I think
that such an assertion is ludicrous.

If women *truly* didn't want to wear such shoes they wouldn't buy
them and if they didn't buy them the vendors would begin selling
something that they *would* buy.

As to the suggestion that women buy them because they have been
conditioned to do so, think a moment about *who* conditioned them.
Who teaches little girls to dress and what to wear?  I think that you
will find that, for the most part, the way women dress is influenced
by what they were taught (explicitly and implicitly) by their mothers.

A question for those of you who believe that high heeled shoes are the
result of a "male conspiracy":  How do you suggest that it was
implemented?


Charlie Sorsby
...!{cmcl2,ihnp4,...}!lanl!crs
crs@lanl.arpa