|
|
Post by sonex on Oct 19, 2012 9:31:58 GMT 10
Rather like.............
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Oct 19, 2012 20:50:44 GMT 10
How wonderful of stellar to finally put up a photo of herself. She looks just like I imagined her to be. |
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Oct 20, 2012 4:03:15 GMT 10
she should wear joggers and start a new world wide trend.
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 20, 2012 13:48:34 GMT 10
I doubt that Julia Gillard needs to be lectured to about footwear by garfield or anyone else ... Treacherous heels the very height of misogyny October 20, 2012 Anne Summers www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/treacherous-heels-the-very-height-of-misogyny-20121019-27wc9.html On a scale of one to 10 of diplomatic embarrassments, where president George Bush vomiting into the lap of the Japanese prime minister while seated next to him at a banquet back in 1992 is a 10, Julia Gillard slipping out of her shoes and taking a tumble in India this week should barely register. Yet to read some of the commentary you would think she had disgraced the nation. Instead of vigorous scrutiny of Gillard's ground-breaking visit, which included a controversial plan to sell uranium to this non-NPT signatory nation, much of the country - including the media - is obsessed by her shoes. Gillard herself made a wry comment about how heels are something men in the public eye don't have to worry about. Women commentators around the world backed her up. (In the wake of Gillard's "sexism and misogyny" speech last week, there is now international interest in what she does.) Some in the media even reminded us of her previous stumble in Sydney weeks back when, again, her heels were to blame. Others harked back to when the PM lost a shoe while being hustled into her car by police during a disturbance on Australia Day in Canberra. This is not just one of those damned if you do/doomed if you don't issues for women politicians, and other women in leadership roles. Wearing heels can be uncomfortable and make you vulnerable to tripping or sinking into wet grass; not wearing heels invites the fashion police to denounce you as frumpy. So, few women leaders will go flat-footed; most of them - like most other women - want to be stylish. But the choices for women today are not just between heels and flats; the height of the heel is the issue, and they have never been higher. In an era when women are supposedly economically liberated and politically empowered, it seems fashion is doing its best to subvert this. A recent report found that Australian women were the most economically empowered of 128 countries surveyed. Yet, the woman executive or company director wanting a pair of ultra-glamorous Christian Louboutin shoes with their trademark red soles would find herself obliged to totter around on 16-centimetre heels. "It's like foot binding - except women are doing it to themselves," says Kirstie Clements, former editor in chief of Australian Vogue. She says Louboutin's original shoe, the classic Pigalle pump, "made you walk sexily, looked beautiful and were comfortable". They had 8.5-centimetre heels. Today Louboutin's lowest is 10 centimetres. These shoes are uncomfortable - "they cripple you before you even leave the house," Clements says. Models at Alexander McQueen's 2010 spring show refused to walk down the catwalk wearing his Alien shoes after several were hurt, one requiring knee surgery. So, if women whose job descriptions require them to don extreme outfits are refusing to wear such shoes, why are ordinary women embracing them with such enthusiasm? Why would a woman who is trying to be taken seriously as a manager, an executive, a director or a politician wear footwear that belongs in the bordello? Long gone are the days when women adopted power suits with shoulder-pads and often added ties, in an effort to blend into the workplace. Today women executives want to be feminine but what is on offer from the men who make shoes - and they are all men: Jimmy Choo, Manolo Blahnik, Louboutin et al - is neither flattering nor womanly. "It has turned into misogyny," says Clements. You could almost posit that there is a reverse correlation between the height of women's heels and their success in the wider world. It's hard to think and perform when you are in constant pain. And this poses a dilemma for women in leadership positions: how to look good while doing their jobs effectively. The Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, has mostly abandoned stilettos for lower, thicker heels. She undoubtedly recognised it would be difficult to be taken seriously in her job - reviewing the troops and so on - if she could not walk with ease and authority. Julia Gillard, too, has had to be pragmatic; she generally adopts a judicious compromise between style and utility by wearing low heels, but even those let her down this week. It must be galling for her, constantly walking a political tightrope, to have to give a second's thought to what she puts on her feet. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2012 13:52:36 GMT 10
She looks like what she claims to be ... an aboriginal elder. But dream on ...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2012 14:01:20 GMT 10
Nope ... we're just having a laugh at her expense. If she can't keep upright on her two feet, she should wear flats with straps so she can't walk out of them.
But the problem is her terrible deportment. She looks unbalanced because of her large derriere. She walks with head in the air and doesn't watch where she is going. That's why she slips and falls and she does it quite regularly.
Now you might think we're being terribly unkind by mentioning all this, but remember that her mishap along with video was reported around the globe - even in the Tehran Times!
|
|
