"Do what you like as long as you harm no one..."
messrprongs:

A guide to red hair

messrprongs:

A guide to red hair

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.
High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.
But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.

High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.

But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

bhosrino-loda-choda:

infamousindigochild:

harleyhendrix:

I watched this for like 20 minutes

It feels like I’m watching the birth of a demon

^^

bhosrino-loda-choda:

infamousindigochild:

harleyhendrix:

I watched this for like 20 minutes

It feels like I’m watching the birth of a demon

^^

Reblog if you think tattooing is an art form

bookjunkie26:

Trying to prove a point

fuckyeahtattoos:

Got this gem at Hudson Tattoo Co. North Bergen, NJ from the amazing Alistair D Borthwick
@ali_tattoos

fuckyeahtattoos:

Got this gem at Hudson Tattoo Co. North Bergen, NJ from the amazing Alistair D Borthwick

@ali_tattoos

7 / 20 Favourite males || 神田ユウ Kanda Yuu

gravitationaltimothy:

sixpenceee:

Francis is another short horror film about a daring 17 year old girl, who finds herself alone in the middle of a lake. Trouble starts to brew. We find ourselves with more questions than answers at the end. (Watch it here) (Masterpost of creepy short films)

As someone who loves horror, animation and games, I would never forgive myself if I didn’t share that great masterpost

Marilyn Manson speech on blame.

the-orator:

Guess what armor I finally got is DS2~~~~

I tried to record my work on this but apparently the video file got corrupted or something because I can’t access it at all….oh well, another time