阅览脱掉高跟鞋

　First they came for the stilettos1…
　　Just before Christmas the media were agog with an allegedly brand-new trend： women throwing away their high heels in the wake of the flurry of revelations of entertainment-industry sexual harassment.2 The idea wasn’t simply that women can run faster to escape from Hollywood predators if they’re wearing Allbirds Wool Runner sneakers instead of four-inch Jimmy Choos.3 It was that flat-heeled shoes enable women to “reclaim control，”presumably from men in general. “Ditching heels can be a way to show that they value their own well-being over men’s desires，” Business Insider’s Kate Taylor wrote.
　　Taylor’s article， like many a piece of reporting produced in this pre-Yule anti-high-heel frenzy， featured photos aimed at proving that flat shoes can be glamorous， too： Gal Gadot in an evening gown and gold thong sandals（as if Gadot wouldn’t look good with her feet wrapped in cleaning rags） and some exceptionally ugly furry and wooden-soled Puma slides said to be favored by Rihanna.4 There was also the obligatory much-mocked photo of that princess of political incorrectness， Melania Trump， her feet clad in black patent-leather five-inch pumps as she boarded Air Force One with her presidential husband this past summer to visit Hurricane Harvey-ravaged Texas （never mind that Melania switched into more practical sneakers before she got off the plane）.5
　　In a similar vein， New York Times fashion reporter Bonnie Wertheim published a December 16 article， “Are High Heels Headed for a Tumble？，” that included photos of still more politically correct （and certifiably hideous6）“comfort shoes” that are supposed to replace the high heel in this sexism-alert age： Crocs （yes， they’re still around）， Dansko clogs （for just $135 you， too， can look like a medieval peasant）， and Birkenstocks （you have to be Heidi Klum to get away with cork-rimmed hippie sandals that make your Size 10 feet look like Size 15’s）.7 Wertheim quoted Northwestern University psychology professor Renée Engeln： “Why do the things we do for ourselves have to hurt？ Why do the shoes we choose for ourselves make us less able to run away if we need to run away？…Why do the things that we do supposedly for ourselves cause us long-term physiological damage？”
　　And as if that campaign against actual stilettos weren’t enough， Florie Hutchinson， a self-described arts publicist in Palo Alto， California， has a campaign against stiletto emojis. Incensed not just at the teetering heel height on the virtual shoe that pops up on smartphones but at its “vixen-ish” bright red color， Hutchinson has asked the Unicode Consortium，8 the nonprofit that approves standardized emojis across platforms， to substitute a ballet flat instead. “The high-heeled stiletto is highly suggestive，” she wrote. “[Stilettos are] most often associated with fetishism and seduction” Hutchinson complained to the media that the stiletto emoji promotes a “sexualized” image of women that could negatively influence her three young daughters.

　If the point of all of this were solicitude9 for women’s comfort， it might make sense. There’s no doubt that wearing ultra-high heels day in and day out for extended periods of time can damage not just your feet but your kneecaps and the muscles in your calves as well.10 A 2012 article in the Journal of Applied Physiology reported that the long-term wearing of even two-inch heels （“kitten”-height） for forty hours a week could lead to muscle fatigue and greater risk of strain injuries11. And that’s not to mention the pain of standing in four-inch heels for a couple of hours at that wedding reception. If you’re a chef or a surgeon or a scrub nurse12 who’s required to spend extended time on your feet， a pair of Danskos is obviously preferable to a pair of Christian Louboutins13. Still， most office jobs for women—the kinds of jobs where a pair of modestly high-heeled pumps might be de rigueur14 for a professional appearance—don’t require a huge amount of standing， and there are entire brands of shoes that specialize in dress pumps designed for maximum workday comfort. Contrary to what the photos in the recent anti-high heels media flurry suggest， women don’t really have to choose between spikes15 and Crocs when it comes to buying footwear.
　　The real goal of the war against high heels seems to be to make wearing them—or being required to wear them at workplaces—socially unacceptable. Hence the periodic declarations in the media that high heels have gone out of style （women are “ditching” them！） and Birkenstocks are in. Or the fanciful pronunciamentos from social scientists that wearing running shoes could help you flee the Harvey Weinsteins in your life.16 There has also been a flurry of antihigh heel legislative bills that would ban employers from mandating17 dress codes for their female employees that include even two-inch heels. British Columbia now has such a law， and Ontario is considering one—although the British Parliament recently rejected such an effort.
　　The most serious obstacle to the anti-high heel campaign—and the reason that high heels keep returning to the fashion and office scene， as they did even during the early 2000s， when it was said that women wearing flats descended the burning towers of 9/11 faster than their sisters in heels—isn’t a male patriarchy leering at the hobbled gait of stilettoed females.18 It’s women themselves. Studies in journals of evolutionary psychology indicate that members of both sexes simply find women wearing high heels more attractive than women in flats. The heel height not only creates an illusion of longer， slimmer legs but changes her walking style and the tilt of her hips. As a 2015 article in Psychology Today explained， “What these shoes do is make women walk even more like women.”And the women who wear high heels regularly know that， and they’re obviously willing to put up with a certain amount of discomfort to get that effect. It’s going to take more than a ballet flat emoji or a breathless article in the New York Times to persuade women to stop wanting to look and feel like women.

刚开端的时分还仅仅关于细高跟鞋……
　　就在圣诞节前不久，媒体上忽然兴起了一个所谓的新趋势：文娱作业的性骚扰作业曝光后引起一阵骚乱，女性随之纷繁开端丢掉自己的高跟鞋。这个观念并不是说从四英寸高跟的名牌鞋换到舒适跟脚的跑步鞋就能更快地从好莱坞的“掠食者”手里逃走，而是说换成平底鞋，能让女性们从男人手里“夺回控制权”。商业内情网站的凯特·泰勒就写道：“丢掉高跟鞋标明晰女性们更关心的是她们自己的健康而不是男性的愿望”。
　　和其他宣布在圣诞前夕反高跟热潮的文章相同，泰勒的这篇报导相同附上了可以证明平底鞋魅力的图片：有盖尔·加朵穿戴晚礼服和金色人字拖的相片（不过加朵就算脚上裹着抹布也会很好看吧），也有蕾哈娜宠爱的那种特别丑的毛烘烘的彪马木底拖鞋。必不可少的还有那位广受诟病的政治不正确夫人梅拉尼娅·特朗普，穿戴五英寸高浅口黑漆皮高跟鞋登上空军一号，和她的总统老公一同在上一年夏天拜访遭到哈维飓风突击的得克萨斯州的相片（虽然梅拉尼娅鄙人飞机的时分现已换上了更有用的运动鞋）。
　　类似地，《纽约时报》的时髦专栏作家邦尼·维特海姆在12月16日宣布了一篇题为《高跟鞋真的要堕入危机了吗？》的文章，文中就插入了愈加政治正确的（但也十分丑恶的）“舒适的鞋子”的相片，想用它们来在这特性别问题十分灵敏的时期替代高跟鞋：比方洞洞鞋（是的，这种鞋仍旧存在呢）、邓肯木鞋（只需135美元你就能看起来和中世纪农人并无两样），还有勃肯凉拖（除非你是海蒂·克鲁姆，否则这种软木边的嬉皮凉鞋会让你10码的脚看起来像15码相同长）。维特海姆还引用了西北大学心理学教授雷内·恩格尔恩的话说：“为什么咱们要做损害自己的作业？为什么咱们穿的鞋在咱们需求逃跑的时分反而更不便利逃跑？为什么咱们做的本该为己的事反而会对自己发生长期的生理损害？”
　　就好像对立细高跟鞋的运动做得还不够到位似的，来自加利福尼亚州帕罗奥图市的弗洛里·哈金森还发起了对立高跟鞋表情符号的运动。哈金森自称为艺术公关，她不只被从手机弹出的虚拟鞋那岌岌可危的高跟所激怒，更是怨恨高跟鞋表情用的那种凶横的大赤色，她要求一致码联盟（一个同意各个渠道标准化表情符号的非营利性组织）用一个平底的芭蕾舞鞋表情去替换掉高跟鞋表情。“高跟鞋的表情有着很强的暗示性，”她写道，“高跟鞋往往和恋物癖还有引诱有关。”哈金森向媒体诉苦说高跟鞋表情推重的是一种女性被“色情化”的形象，这对她三岁大的女儿会有很欠好的影响。
　　假如这一切都仅仅出于对女性舒适与否的关心，那情有可原。毫无疑问，常常性地整天穿戴恨天高不只会对脚形成损害，膝盖骨和小腿肚的肌肉也会遭到影响。2012年宣布在《使用生理学杂志》的一篇文章就指出，哪怕穿戴只要两英寸高的高跟鞋（小猫跟），一周穿40个小时，也会引起肌肉疲劳并添加肌肉拉伤的危险。更别提在婚宴上穿戴四英寸高的高跟鞋站好几个小时的那种苦楚。假如你是一个像厨师、外科医生或许助理护理那种需求长时刻站立作业的人，很明显，比较于名牌高跟鞋，平底鞋是一个更好的挑选。不过，大部分女性从事的办公室作业——便是那种因为交际礼仪，穿恰当高度的高跟鞋会显得更作业的作业—— 一般不会要求长时刻的站立，而且还有许多鞋的品牌会为了最大极限的舒适作业体会而专门规划作业高跟鞋。与最近的反高跟风云报导中的相片所显现的观念相反，女性在买鞋时并不是只要高跟鞋和洞洞鞋这两种挑选。
　　这场反高跟战争的真实方针似乎是要让穿高跟鞋——或许说被要求在作业场合穿高跟鞋——不被社会广泛承受。因而才有了媒体时不时地宣称高跟鞋现已过期（女性们现已在“扔掉”高跟鞋了！）而勃肯鞋才是潮流这样的言辞，或许是那些社会学家说的穿上跑鞋才干脱节你生射中的哈维·韦恩斯坦这样的富丽宣言。甚至有阵子还呈现了对立高跟鞋的立法草案，制止用人单位在着装规则里要求女性职工穿哪怕是两英寸的高跟鞋。加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省现在就有了这样的法令规则，而安大略省也在考虑拟定一条这样的法令——不过英国国会最近否决了这一做法。
　　反高跟鞋举动最重要的妨碍——以及高跟鞋一直在重回时髦圈和办公室的原因，哪怕在21世纪前期的时分人们说穿戴平底鞋的女性比穿戴高跟鞋的女性在逃离911火灾现场时下楼更快——并不在于父权社会下男性喜爱偷瞄穿戴高跟鞋女性踉跄的身影。相反，其实是在于女性自己。进化心理学相关杂志里的研讨标明，不管是男性仍是女性都以为穿高跟鞋的女性比穿平底鞋的女性更吸引人。鞋跟的高度不只会形成腿更细更长的幻觉，也改变了女性走路的方法和臀部的翘度。正如《今天心理学》在2015年宣布的一篇文章所说：“这些鞋子让女性走起路来更像女性”。而那些常常穿高跟鞋的女性也留意到了这一点，因而她们更愿意为了到达这样的作用而献身一点舒适感。压服女性不再想看上去更女性或是感觉自己更女性，恐怕替换一个芭蕾舞鞋表情或许在《纽约时报》写一版长篇大论的文章是远远不够的。
　　1. stiletto： // 细跟高跟鞋。
　　2. agog： 振奋等待的，急于了解的；flurry：骚乱，不安。
　　3. Allbirds： 美国闻名运动鞋品牌，Wool Runner sneaker指其系带运动鞋款；Jimmy Choos：吉米·周，是闻名高跟鞋品牌。
　　4. pre-Yule： 圣诞节之前；Gal Gadot：盖尔·加朵，以色列女艺人、模特，在《速度与热情4》中出演了人物Gisele；thong： 人字拖鞋；sole：鞋底；Rihanna： 蕾哈娜，美国女歌手，曾多次取得格莱美奖。
　　5. obligatory： 责任的；patent-leather：漆皮的；pump： 浅口高跟鞋。
　　6. hideous： 可怕的，丑恶的。
　　7. Crocs： 闻名鞋类品牌，以洞洞鞋著称；Dansko： 邓肯，闻名鞋类品牌；clog： 木底鞋；Birkenstocks： 勃肯鞋，闻名鞋类品牌，以双条拖鞋著称；Heidi Klum： 海蒂·克鲁姆，德国模特、艺人；cork-rimmed： 软木边的。
　　8. incensed at： 被……激怒；vixenish：凶横的，桀的；consortium： 联盟，联合企业。
　　9. solicitude： 关心，挂念。
　　10. day in and day out： 废寝忘食地；calf（复数calves）： 小腿肚。
　　11. strain injury： 肌肉拉伤。
　　12. scrub nurse： 助理护理。
　　13. Christian Louboutins： 闻名高跟鞋品牌，以赤色鞋底为特征。
　　14. de rigueur： 法语，指礼节需求的。
　　15. spike： 本意为长钉，可用来指代高跟鞋。
　　16. pronunciamentos： ，指宣言，声明；Harvey Weinstein：哈维·韦恩斯坦，美国电影制作人，2017年年末爆出大规模性骚扰丑闻。
　　17. mandate： 规则，公布。
　　18. patriarchy： 父权社会；leer at： 色眯眯地审察；hobbled： 踉跄的；gait： 脚步。 勃肯涼鞋

阅览脱掉高跟鞋！
作者：By Charlotte Allen
来历：学习