CRUSHING PAIN: A Way of Life

CRUSHING PAIN: A Way of Life

There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

CRUSHING PAIN: An Way of Life

 There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

CRUSHING PAIN: An Way of Life

 There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

CRUSHING PAIN: An Way of Life

 There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

CRUSHING PAIN: An Way of Life

 There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

CRUSHING PAIN: An Way of Life

 There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

CRUSHING PAIN: An Way of Life

 There is a device, used by hordes of people, which crunches muscles, leads to back aches and headaches, sometimes causes fractures, bunions, shortened Achilles tendons and reduced mobility in dangerous situations that is foisted on girls rather early in life. If you haven't caught on, I'm talking about high heels. Yes, high heels without which the vast number of women does not feel properly dressed. Because of the discomfort, sometimes extreme, women carry “sensible” (more about this below) shoes with them to wear at every opportunity or, if none is handy, heels are kicked off at the first opportunity.

High heels are essentially torture devices so why, with women represented as the sensible sex, do they foist such pain and distress for themselves?

Starting in ancient Greece, the history of heels follows two paths. Sandals were, are perfectly reasonable ways to protect feet from unpaved surfaces. But, muck and mud made life difficult. Aeschylus, that great Greek playwright, inadvertently provided a solution. He insisted that actors who played exalted roles make themselves taller and heels did the trick. For dramatic purposes, he wanted gods and kings to tower over humans and heels provided the message that the role played was noteworthy. It became obvious that heels could raise the person above the muck of the streets so they gradually became somewhat popular. Women continued with heels; aristocratic women wore what were essentially stilts to demonstrate their superior social position. Sometimes these were as much as thirty inches tall and required that servants keep the woman from falling. And, what better way so show superiority than being kept erect by non-entities.

Madame Pompadour started the high heel vogue, it was known as the French heel. Other courtesans followed suit; some women in the oldest of professions noticed that men were a bit more interested in them if they wore heels. This reality became formalized in an American brothel when a heel wearing, French lady of the night got most of the business  Something about a semi-clad woman prancing around in heels prompted men's sexual enthusiasm, and men are always willing to pay for such fun. The Madam then insisted that her other sporting ladies also wear heels. I suppose that put the French lady back into the pack, but you can bet that brothel did superior business.

The men, the beneficiaries of such displays of pulchritude then demanded that their wives also wear heels; if you can have it at home, why pay for it? I assume the wives were enthusiastic about their increased allure; heels became essential to a come-hither style.

What, the perpetually curious person might ask, is so sexually compelling about high heels? Well, they make the foot seem smaller, plump out the calves, make the buttocks protrude and thrust the breasts forward. Further, the high heel walk with its gentle sway adds to the enchantment. What's pain and suffering compared to that?

Okay, but things have changed. Now that all women can get such footwear, they no longer are a symbol of social superiority. Women no longer need protection from muck on the ground; they no longer wear clothes that drag and now have boots for walking in mud. Of course, once at their destination, off come the mud shoes and on go the heels. Heels surely present a sexually assertive message and additionally, because they raise the woman's height they seem more equal with men. No wonder men were afraid to have women break the glass ceiling.

While the power message is still there, it is attractiveness that drives the behavior. Women will do almost anything to make themselves attractive to men. Bustles, which made it impossible for them to sit, were required in good company. Corsets made it impossible for them to breath and fantastic amounts of money have been spent since ancient Egypt started the practice of alluring disguise: cosmetics. Billions are spent on cosmetic augmentations. Women paint their faces coif their hair, shave their legs and douse themselves with pleasant aromas to send the message. Without a clue about how it all started, they are simply modern versions of Madame Pompadour who surely knew how to attract men. And, huzzah for that. And sensible shoes, the kind that don't cause pain or twist feet; hell, one would think they would exemplify the ideal and the heels described as nonsensical. And now, women are wearing heels with 3-inch soles. I bet ERs will become busier with twisted ankles, scratches and bumps. Not so. Hells, whoops, heels are here to stay.

Contrast all this with the Muslim ideal for woman and to some degree for Orthodox Jewish women and some Christian sects. The idea is that woman's sexual attraction is so powerful that they must not come into contact with men and with the strict Muslims, the only parts of a woman a man may see are her eyes and hands. Orthodox Jewish men may not shake hands with a woman, or worship with them; the distraction would be too much for him. In such societies, women’s sexuality is considered incredibly potent and in Western Civilization women, like the Red Queen have to run hard just to stay in place in the sexual game.

For most women it is surely apprehensible

If they merely wear shoes that are sensible

They put up with the pain

For sexual gain

And argue that such is defensible.

Suppressing voters

VOTING FRAUD: A Disastrous Scourge

We are on the brink of national catastrophe, a scourge that could devastate our democracy. We are faced with the specter of voter fraud that hordes, a veritable multitude of non-Americans will descend on voting booths and, gasp, sully the core of our republic. Or at least, so a large segment of politicians and the public agree. In order to defend against this mockery of America, they have proposed a variety of preventive measures to ensure the purity of our ballot.

You may remember, or at least know about the south which devoted much of its energy to keeping black people in their place. Share-cropping, a system of bondage labor with a plantation store to reap further profits, efficiently kept black citizens from rising out of poverty. But, you will argue, they could vote and change things for themselves; could they not organize for political purposes? Well, ignorance and the Klan put quietus to such organization, but they could still vote . . . except for the poll tax and literacy tests which essentially eliminated the black American from the polls. Poor people could not afford the poll tax and with education for blacks essentially non-existent passing a literacy test became a hurdle over which they could not leap. Ugly stuff but it surely is done with, eliminated by an enlightened society. Alas not. The reality of what is now called “voter suppression,” is very much a part of our political environment. The whole point is to eliminate particular classes of voters; sometimes it is done legally and sometimes not so with concern for ethicality totally defenestrated. (See, you failed the test.)

Still, it seems reasonable to require a picture ID in order to vote. Is that not that requirement within the pale? Should we not be sure of whom it is who casts a vote? After all, who doesn't have such a document? Who? The poor. It costs money to own a car and costs money to have a license; the poor and disabled are less likely to have such financial encumbrances and whom do they vote for? Well, usually Democrats, as if that's a crime. Of course, such demands are not a poll tax, surely not, we no longer tolerate such things, do we?

Is that it? Sorry, there is more. In the recent recall election in Wisconsin, the Republicans knew they would lose so they put up a bogus slate of Democrats to lure unwary voters into voting for them, thus splitting the Democratic vote, ensuring a loss. It didn't work, most Democrats figured it out. Another trick was to call those likely to vote for recall and give them bogus deadlines to get their votes in. The idea was that the victims would think they had more time to cast their ballot until, horrors, they were too late. To some degree, such tricks worked but three state legislators were recalled in a partial Democratic victory.

How about getting people off the list of eligible voters? Here, I mean in Colorado, the Secretary of State has moved to get rid of “inactive” voters. Even though the word inactive is not defined by law, he asserted that missing one vote proved your inactivity so off you went. And, who are those who are more likely to miss a vote? You'd have to be a poor guesser not to have chosen the poor and the disabled. Never mind that they poor have a harder time taking off from work and that if they do they lose money, or that the disabled, well, they are disabled and voting is more problematic for them. Fortunately, saner heads have taken this matter to court and we might anticipate that such obvious voter suppression would be rejected. But, what if the judge is not of the saner sort?

Keep in mind that all of this is in service of keeping the multitude of the non-citizens from voting as if they are poised to do so. Are there examples of such? Of course, the system is not perfect, but aside from the few who sneak a ballot, our system works. In order for there to be a real, not fanciful problem, the non-citizens would have to organize, develop leaders and a cadre around which such a massive effort would gain coherence. Alas for the vote-suppressors, there is no such effort; if there were it would be legally flattened, turned into inconsequential mush. No, there is no voting disaster heading our way unless . . . unless it is that proposed by the suppressors. A pox on them.

ALTE PISHER

ALTE PISHER

12-5-11

One of the great Jewish sneers is to call an aging gentleman an Alte Kocker. In strict translation, it means a man of distinguished years who shits all the time. Well, obviously, unless diarrhea is involved that doesn't happen very much. The subtle meaning of the phrase is to denigrate the person, to imply that he is not to be taken seriously. As I write this I realize that women, at least in my experience are never called AKs, short hand for the term; no point in wasting energy saying the entire line. No, I don't know why women are not included but a reasonable guess is that no one in the good old days expected women to do anything except marry and have children so there is nothing much to denigrate.

But, much more prevalent among men who reaching their glory years is the reality that they pee more than is seemly. In other words, the aging process turns us into Alte Pishers. The problem in medical terms or among the too snooty to speak of bodily functions is BPH, benign prostate hypertrophy; whatever you call it, it means that we poor souls become considerably more familiar with pissoirs, French for bathrooms. The prostate becomes big and squeezes the tube (What the hell do you call it?) running from bladder to exit device hence the problem. Suffering from AP syndrome means a) that you pee a lot and b) not much comes out. It also means interrupted sleep, getting up three or four times a night to reduce the pressure. Parenthetically, in the old days your doc would stick his properly protected finger up your behind to check its size, but of late that seems no longer medical vogue. Well, I don't mind.

Calling someone an AP in my vast experience is reasonably rare. When I was young I'd refer to some elderly folk as AKs, but the aging process reduces the number of those who deserve the term. Only an exceptionally clever person would call a younger man an AK; the older one becomes, the smaller the population of older folks thus reducing the opportunity. Still, as I write this I think the term fits for Newt Gingrich whose outrageous, mindless pronouncements , I.E. get rid of child labor laws, tell me his gravitas is simply non-existent.

Back to AP. What compounds my problem is that in a miserly way I tend to retain fluids so I am given a medicine that, you guessed it makes me pish. So, wherever I go, my pishdar locates the nearest restrooms so that when the urge appears, as is now common I know exactly where to hasten for bladder relief.So, reaching AP status is another marker along the road to being old. White hair, a bit of macular degeneration, difficulty in getting off the floor after repairing the sink, a low level of persistent arthritic pain, creaky muscles, and a brain that doesn't quite function as in the past are other markers promising that if I survive I'll truly be an old man. I know that some aged people past ninety never seem to age; I fondly hope, with little expectation of fulfilled hope that I well be in that group.

Byron wrote, in Rabbi Ben Ezra (not sure of the title) “grow old with me, the best is yet to be. Bullshit.

If you think about life I'm an ingrate

Consider my crappy old prostate

It demands that I pee

Often two times or three

If there is god that's who I'll berate.

FATE

FATE

7-13-09

There is no such thing. Things happen without our control and we invent things about them. Asians call fate Kismet, meaning when bad things happen the only thing to do is shrug and live your life. Fate implies that there is some mysterious force that operates in the universe that controls our destiny. It was Charlie's fate never to meet a decent woman is what people say about Charlie, meaning that it was somehow ordained by the universe..

Humans have huge egos. We easily develop the notion that the universe takes an interest in us or ignores us when it should not. So many things happen of which we do not approve and we bizarrely become upset, either bemoaning our fate (there's that word again) or becoming angry when things go wrong. We miss the obvious: there is no rational reason that the universe should pay attention to our desires. We do not as separate entities exist in the universe, we are part of the universe as much as the earth we walk on or the stars in the sky.

How did we get here? Religionists insist that there is a determining part of existence that created the universe, i.e. god, that created us. The thought seems to make some people happy, but at the same time left many people uncertain. Instead of accepting received wisdom, they raised questions. That God created us did and does not satisfy. Human beings just a few hundred years ago began to understand the process of how we became . . . us: Evolution. Paying attention to that process makes it evident our transformations over time were natural events, a function of the state of the universe's interaction with protoplasm. No one knows how protoplasm got started. Some thing it was in primordial oceans hit by lightening that made things that lived. Others think that spores of life, floating through space, landed on earth and survived. Some think that aliens seeded earth with life for whatever purpose they had. Did God do it? The trouble with God explanations is that they stop inquiry and godly institutions, jelouse of their perquisites, sometimes killed people who wanted more knowledge.

Some religionists argue that everything in the universe is exquisitely balanced so as to make life possible. If the earth were too hot, or too cold, we could not survive. Too much or too little radiation, if Planck's constant were was a fraction different it would have forestalled our existence. Thus, they argue, that the universe must have been created so we would have a place to live. Idiotic! They miss the point that however life started it would have gone no further had it not fit in. There is no knowing how many times some form of life appeared but could not live in the environment as it was. All sorts of changes happened to the protoplasm and most died out; only our strain survived. When the environment changed we adapted. But, sometimes adaption was not possible and huge species died. The dinosaurs could not make it after the giant meteor hit the earth. Our forebears did. Of course they changed to meet the new conditions and over eons we changed and changed and changed to meet new environments. Nothing about the universe was designed for us; adapt or disappear. The fossil record attests to that.

We all face the problem of how to live an acceptable life in the face of an intractable universe. By far, the great bulk of humanity react with emotions that have no relation to the problem. A patient described how, once, he shook a fist at the sky in outrage for something or other that had gone wrong. What's the point? Yes, he said he felt better after doing so, but it had never occurred to him that he could feel better by accepting loss as part of life and to continue to strive to enjoy his life. “I can't be happy unless the universe does such and so,” is the lament. Humbug, sheer, unadulterated humbug. But prayers are made urging God to change the rules and most prefer not to notice when he, she or it doesn't pull it off. After all, at least there is somebody there listening and making decisions on a master plan which we cannot comprehend.

Yeah. To quote that great song, “It ain’t necessarily so.