脱掉高跟鞋！

2018-06-12ByCharlotteAllen

英语学习 2018年6期

By Charlotte Allen

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 wasnt simply that women can run faster to escape from Hollywood predators if theyre 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 mens desires，” Business Insiders Kate Taylor wrote.

Taylors 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 wouldnt 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， theyre 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 15s）.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 werent 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 womens comfort， it might make sense. Theres 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 thats not to mention the pain of standing in four-inch heels for a couple of hours at that wedding reception. If youre a chef or a surgeon or a scrub nurse12 whos 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—dont 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 dont 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—isnt a male patriarchy leering at the hobbled gait of stilettoed females.18 Its 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 theyre obviously willing to put up with a certain amount of discomfort to get that effect. Its 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.

刚开始的时候还只是关于细高跟鞋……

就在圣诞节前不久，媒体上突然兴起了一个所谓的新趋势：娱乐行业的性骚扰事件曝光后引起一阵骚动，女性随之纷纷开始扔掉自己的高跟鞋。这个观点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”。商业内幕网站的凯特·泰勒就写道：“扔掉高跟鞋表明了女性们更关心的是她们自己的健康而不是男性的欲望”。

和其他发表在圣诞前夕反高跟热潮的文章一样，泰勒的这篇报道同样附上了能够证明平底鞋魅力的图片：有盖尔·加朵穿着晚礼服和金色人字拖的照片（不过加朵就算脚上裹着抹布也会很好看吧），也有蕾哈娜钟爱的那种特别丑的毛茸茸的彪马木底拖鞋。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，穿着五英寸高浅口黑漆皮高跟鞋登上空军一号，和她的总统丈夫一起在去年夏天访问受到哈维飓风袭击的得克萨斯州的照片（尽管梅拉尼娅在下飞机的时候已经换上了更实用的运动鞋）。

类似地，《纽约时报》的时尚专栏作家邦尼·维特海姆在12月16日发表了一篇题为《高跟鞋真的要陷入危机了吗？》的文章，文中就插入了更加政治正确的（但也非常丑陋的）“舒适的鞋子”的照片，想用它们来在这个性别问题非常敏感的时期代替高跟鞋：比如洞洞鞋（是的，这种鞋依旧存在呢）、邓肯木鞋（只要135美元你就能看起来和中世纪农民并无两样），还有勃肯凉拖（除非你是海蒂·克鲁姆，不然这种软木边的嬉皮凉鞋会让你10码的脚看起来像15码一样长）。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：“为什么我们要做伤害自己的事情？为什么我们穿的鞋在我们需要逃跑的时候反而更不方便逃跑？为什么我们做的本该为己的事反而会对自己产生长期的生理损伤？”

就好像反对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·哈金森还发起了反对高跟鞋表情符号的运动。哈金森自称为艺术公关，她不仅被从手机弹出的虚拟鞋那摇摇欲坠的高跟所激怒，更是痛恨高跟鞋表情用的那种泼辣的大红色，她要求统一码联盟（一个批准各个平台标准化表情符号的非营利性机构）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诱惑有关。”哈金森向媒体抱怨说高跟鞋表情推崇的是一种女性被“色情化”的形象，这对她三岁大的女儿会有很不好的影响。

如果这一切都只是出于对女性舒适与否的关心，那情有可原。毫无疑问，经常性地整天穿着恨天高不仅会对脚造成伤害，膝盖骨和小腿肚的肌肉也会受到影响。2012年发表在《应用生理学杂志》的一篇文章就指出，哪怕穿着只有两英寸高的高跟鞋（小猫跟），一周穿40个小时，也会引起肌肉疲劳并增加肌肉拉伤的风险。更别提在婚宴上穿着四英寸高的高跟鞋站好几个小时的那种痛苦。如果你是一个像厨师、外科医生或者助理护士那种需要长时间站立工作的人，很明显，相比于名牌高跟鞋，平底鞋是一个更好的选择。不过，大部分女性从事的办公室工作——就是那种由于社交礼仪，穿适当高度的高跟鞋会显得更职业的工作—— 一般不会要求长时间的站立，并且还有很多鞋的品牌会为了最大限度的舒适工作体验而专门设计职业高跟鞋。与最近的反高跟风波报道中的照片所显示的观点相反，女性在买鞋时并不是只有高跟鞋和洞洞鞋这两种选择。

这场反高跟战役的真正目标似乎是要让穿高跟鞋——或者说被要求在工作场合穿高跟鞋——不被社会广泛接受。因而才有了媒体时不时地声称高跟鞋已经过时（女性们已经在“抛弃”高跟鞋了！）而勃肯鞋才是潮流这样的言论，或者是那些社会学家说的穿上跑鞋才能摆脱你生命中的哈维·韦恩斯坦这样的华丽宣言。甚至有阵子还出现了反对高跟鞋的立法草案，禁止用人单位在着装规定里要求女性员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律规定，而安大略省也在考虑制定一条这样的法律——不过英国国会最近否决了这一做法。

反高跟鞋行动最重要的障碍——以及高跟鞋一直在重回时尚圈和办公室的原因，哪怕在21世纪早期的时候人们说穿着平底鞋的女性比穿着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欢偷瞄穿着高跟鞋女性蹒跚的身影。相反，其实是在于女性自己。进化心理学相关杂志里的研究表明，不管是男性还是女性都认为穿高跟鞋的女性比穿平底鞋的女性更吸引人。鞋跟的高度不仅会造成腿更细更长的错觉，也改变了女性走路的方式和臀部的翘度。正如《今日心理学》在2015年发表的一篇文章所说：“这些鞋子让女性走起路来更像女性”。而那些经常穿高跟鞋的女性也注意到了这一点，因此她们更愿意为了达到这样的效果而牺牲一点舒适感。说服女性不再想看上去更女人或是感觉自己更女人，恐怕替换一个芭蕾舞鞋表情或者在《纽约时报》写一版长篇累牍的文章是远远不够的。

1. stiletto： // 细跟高跟鞋。

2. agog：兴奋期待的，急于了解的；flurry：骚动，不安。

3. Allbirds：美国知名运动鞋品牌，Wool Runner sneaker指其系带运动鞋款；Jimmy Choos：吉米·周，是著名高跟鞋品牌。

4. pre-Yule：圣诞节之前；Gal Gadot：盖尔·加朵，以色列女演员、模特，在《速度与激情4》中出演了角色Gisele；thong：人字拖鞋；sole：鞋底；Rihanna：蕾哈娜，美国女歌手，曾多次获得格莱美奖。

5. obligatory：义务的；patent-leather：漆皮的；pump：浅口高跟鞋。

6. hideous：可怕的，丑陋的。

7. Crocs：著名鞋类品牌，以洞洞鞋著称；Dansko：邓肯，著名鞋类品牌；clog：木底鞋；Birkenstocks：勃肯鞋，知名鞋类品牌，以双条拖鞋著称；Heidi Klum：海蒂·克鲁姆，德国模特、演员；cork-rimmed：软木边的。

8. incensed at：被……激怒；vixenish：泼辣的，凶悍的；consortium：联盟，联合企业。

9. solicitude：关怀，牵挂。

10. day in and day out：夜以继日地；calf（复数calves）：小腿肚。

11. strain injury：肌肉拉伤。

12. scrub nurse：助理护士。