The Instigator
SteveG1973
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
PeriodicPatriot
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Men wearing high heels

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
SteveG1973
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/22/2014 Category: Fashion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,449 times Debate No: 44405
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

SteveG1973

Pro

When heeled shoe first started they started back in the 1600 as a way for some one male or female to keep their feet from sliding out of stirrups when riding a horse. It wasn't until the modern time's that men kind of tossed this style of shoe aside. They did this because they had to go off and fight wars that, at the time female's could not do. When you look back to the renaissance time period men of nobility always wore some sort of heeled shoe. It was typically thought that the higher the heel on the shoe the higher their stature in that given society. Men's mode of dress during this time period was far different also. Men of nobility dressed far more extravagant than a common man and lived a far more pampers and lavished life.

Fast forward to more modern times. When the industrial revolution hit and many men went off to work in factory's this necessitated that they change their mode of dress. They wore clothing that was more subdued, rugged and eraser to move around in in this type of harsh working environment. Yet there was still a select group of men who still wore a heeled shoe and that was a butcher. They did so to keep their feet of of blood from an animal. Females during this time period still where for the most part stay at home and take care of the kids and home. It wasn't until WW2 that women where forced into the work place. Once they entered into the work place this necessitated yet another change in how female's had to dress. Yet they where still expected to go home after work and go back to being, for lack of better terms girly.

Now into more of a more modern setting. We are now seeing a big swing as far as male and female's in the work force and what their job's are. We are starting to see more men as stay at home dad's while the women go out and pay the bills. When we look at clothing in general there is nothing that give's that clothing a sex or a gender, and please do not get the two confused there is a difference between sex and gender. What happens is any given society assigns a certain sex to look a certain way. It is society that say's this is for that sex and this is for this sex. Female's are told that they have to be more "vein" as far as their looks go. While men are told not to worry about their appearance. It hasn't been until the last few years that men have finally started to step up to the plate and take owner ship of the way they look.

I relation to high heels there is nothing that say this style of shoe belongs to this sex or that sex. It is up to which ever sex to decide if they want to wear high heels. To say that high heels are for female's only is like saying every female would have to wear them and that is the only shoe they can wear. To me shoe's are shoe's no matter which side of the store society puts them on. My mode of thinking "is that if the shoe fit's wear it!"
PeriodicPatriot

Con

I kindly accept your challenge.
Debate Round No. 1
SteveG1973

Pro

When heeled shoe first started they started back in the 1600 as a way for some one male or female to keep their feet from sliding out of stirrups when riding a horse. It wasn't until the modern time's that men kind of tossed this style of shoe aside. They did this because they had to go off and fight wars that, at the time female's could not do. When you look back to the renaissance time period men of nobility always wore some sort of heeled shoe. It was typically thought that the higher the heel on the shoe the higher their stature in that given society. Men's mode of dress during this time period was far different also. Men of nobility dressed far more extravagant than a common man and lived a far more pampers and lavished life.

Fast forward to more modern times. When the industrial revolution hit and many men went off to work in factory's this necessitated that they change their mode of dress. They wore clothing that was more subdued, rugged and eraser to move around in in this type of harsh working environment. Yet there was still a select group of men who still wore a heeled shoe and that was a butcher. They did so to keep their feet of of blood from an animal. Females during this time period still where for the most part stay at home and take care of the kids and home. It wasn't until WW2 that women where forced into the work place. Once they entered into the work place this necessitated yet another change in how female's had to dress. Yet they where still expected to go home after work and go back to being, for lack of better terms girly.

Now into more of a more modern setting. We are now seeing a big swing as far as male and female's in the work force and what their job's are. We are starting to see more men as stay at home dad's while the women go out and pay the bills. When we look at clothing in general there is nothing that give's that clothing a sex or a gender, and please do not get the two confused there is a difference between sex and gender. What happens is any given society assigns a certain sex to look a certain way. It is society that say's this is for that sex and this is for this sex. Female's are told that they have to be more "vein" as far as their looks go. While men are told not to worry about their appearance. It hasn't been until the last few years that men have finally started to step up to the plate and take owner ship of the way they look.

I relation to high heels there is nothing that say this style of shoe belongs to this sex or that sex. It is up to which ever sex to decide if they want to wear high heels. To say that high heels are for female's only is like saying every female would have to wear them and that is the only shoe they can wear. To me shoe's are shoe's no matter which side of the store society puts them on. My mode of thinking "is that if the shoe fit's wear it!"
PeriodicPatriot

Con

'I relation to high heels there is nothing that say this style of shoe belongs to this sex or that sex. It is up to which ever sex to decide if they want to wear high heels. To say that high heels are for female's only is like saying every female would have to wear them and that is the only shoe they can wear. To me shoe's are shoe's no matter which side of the store society puts them on. My mode of thinking "is that if the shoe fit's wear it!"'

Men's feet and legs are longer than women. That is why they stopped wearing them.

'When heeled shoe first started they started back in the 1600 as a way for some one male or female to keep their feet from sliding out of stirrups when riding a horse. It wasn't until the modern time's that men kind of tossed this style of shoe aside. They did this because they had to go off and fight wars that, at the time female's could not do. When you look back to the renaissance time period men of nobility always wore some sort of heeled shoe. It was typically thought that the higher the heel on the shoe the higher their stature in that given society. Men's mode of dress during this time period was far different also. Men of nobility dressed far more extravagant than a common man and lived a far more pampers and lavished life.
'Fast forward to more modern times. When the industrial revolution hit and many men went off to work in factory's this necessitated that they change their mode of dress. They wore clothing that was more subdued, rugged and eraser to move around in in this type of harsh working environment. Yet there was still a select group of men who still wore a heeled shoe and that was a butcher. They did so to keep their feet of of blood from an animal. Females during this time period still where for the most part stay at home and take care of the kids and home. It wasn't until WW2 that women where forced into the work place. Once they entered into the work place this necessitated yet another change in how female's had to dress. Yet they where still expected to go home after work and go back to being, for lack of better terms girly.'

That was way back then.

'Now into more of a more modern setting. We are now seeing a big swing as far as male and female's in the work force and what their job's are. We are starting to see more men as stay at home dad's while the women go out and pay the bills. When we look at clothing in general there is nothing that give's that clothing a sex or a gender, and please do not get the two confused there is a difference between sex and gender. What happens is any given society assigns a certain sex to look a certain way. It is society that say's this is for that sex and this is for this sex. Female's are told that they have to be more "vein" as far as their looks go. While men are told not to worry about their appearance. It hasn't been until the last few years that men have finally started to step up to the plate and take owner ship of the way they look.'

Yes, there is a difference between sex and gender. Are you reffering to sexuality?

Debate Round No. 2
SteveG1973

Pro

Men's feet and legs are longer than women. That is why they stopped wearing them.

If you are referring to the height difference between males and females. That does not cut it. There are many women tha are over 6' tall and still wear heels. The reason that women wear heels is because society has told them that they need to do so in order to attrack a man. If you want to talk about height in relation to heels the avg hieght of a male in 2013 is 5'9" while a female is about 5'5" so you can not really say it was because of height that men stopped. They stopped because the shoe was sexualulized by out society. When you take that in context men don't wear them because people will assume he is gay and the last thing most men want is their sexuality called I to question.

No I was not referring to sexuality. I understand the difference. What this comes down to is the objctifcation of women. For the most part in today's society women are objectified. So everything that women wear is designed to objectify them. Women even though they are far better off than they where just a few years they still have a long way to go. What May argument comes down to is simply this. Society looks at this type of thing as a deviant behavior. Yet where a pair of shoes no matter where them come from does not change someone behavior.
PeriodicPatriot

Con

If you are referring to the height difference between males and females. That does not cut it. There are many women tha are over 6' tall and still wear heels. The reason that women wear heels is because society has told them that they need to do so in order to attrack a man. If you want to talk about height in relation to heels the avg hieght of a male in 2013 is 5'9" while a female is about 5'5" so you can not really say it was because of height that men stopped. They stopped because the shoe was sexualulized by out society. When you take that in context men don't wear them because people will assume he is gay and the last thing most men want is their sexuality called I to question.
I was referring with something else.

No I was not referring to sexuality. I understand the difference. What this comes down to is the objctifcation of women. For the most part in today's society women are objectified. So everything that women wear is designed to objectify them. Women even though they are far better off than they where just a few years they still have a long way to go. What May argument comes down to is simply this. Society looks at this type of thing as a deviant behavior. Yet where a pair of shoes no matter where them come from does not change someone behavior.
Ok, good.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by SteveG1973 2 years ago
SteveG1973
For me it's more about style and the fact it gives me a little more height. Being only 5' 6" it's nice to be kind of taller for once. You are right that they can be killer on the feet. I thank you for you honest opinion.
Posted by gymnastseal 2 years ago
gymnastseal
I think this a really interesting debate and both sides have very strong arguments but coming from a girls perspective" why would you want to wear heels? I hate to break it to you" but they hurt. Aside from that I do believe that everyone has their right to choose what they want to do without others judging them for being different. Who knows, in the future maybe men wearing heels will become an accepted thing. Prior to pretty recently, it was considered scandalous for a woman to wear pants. Things change. If wearing heels becomes an accepted thing for males" well good luck balancing in those fabulous-looking shoes from hell :D

Just my humble opinion
XOXOXO
Posted by saccity10 3 years ago
saccity10
So...how about them midgets?
Posted by SteveG1973 3 years ago
SteveG1973
I changed it try that.
Posted by SteveG1973 3 years ago
SteveG1973
I can see if it will let me change it.
Posted by PeriodicPatriot 3 years ago
PeriodicPatriot
I'd like to debate this with you, but I guess I don't match your age or critica
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 2Sense 3 years ago
2Sense
SteveG1973PeriodicPatriotTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro presented his arguments thoroughly, while Con didn't really respond to the points made, nor did he make points that were substantiated with evidence and relevance to the question at hand. Con also didn't provide any solid arguments/conclusions, but instead copy/pasted paragraphs of Pro's arguments and responded with very brief quips lacking substance. Overall, Pro had the better arguments, though neither provided any supporting evidence.