#i really don't care | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

beyondthisdarkhouse · 2 years

Text

Content warning: Discussion of grievous bodily injury

So, both my first two theories on the origin of high-heeled shoes in European fashion turned out to be bunk. I mean, I know that originally men wore high heels, but I did not expect the manner in which they appeared on the fashion scene.

(And no, the answer isn’t “butchers” either. Butchers in ancient Egypt wore high heels. Then they went out of fashion for, uh... a while.)

(And yes, I already said that high heels weren’t integral to my line of research. I spent a day writing up this post anyway. NOT EVEN I CAN STOP MYSELF SOMETIMES.)

My first theory was kind of wild. I thought high heels might be descended from the wooden platform shoes medieval Europeans wore to keep out of muddy conditions:

It would have been cool because platform shoes got RIDICULOUS, but we’ll have to get back to chopines another day. They don’t feature in this story.

As I got deeper into the research, I had to admit to myself that I was subconsciously expecting high heels to evolve from what I thought of as “conservative” and “natural” heels, to the more “refined” and “unnatural” heels.

But that’s projecting modern sensibilities into the past. These days we’re concerned with whether shoes will fit with our lives, the ways we move and the spaces we live with. We don’t even know what the concerns of the past are, and therefore aren’t good at predicting why they’d pick one shoe over another.

I therefore did not expect the shoe that convinced sixteenth-century Europe that high heels were the Next Big Thing to be... this one.

Not that exact pair, you understand, so it’s not just because of that absolutely divine aquamarine colour. But those are one of the best extant examples of 16th century Persian cavalry shoes.

In fact, those are

elite tactical military gear

I’ll explain, but it’s gonna get dark.

Let’s talk horses

(HORSE PEOPLE: DON’T GET UP MY GRILL ABOUT INCONSEQUENTIAL DETAILS, PLZTHX)

Horses are big round sleek bundles of nerves. They’re prey animals. They like to jump and start and flee from anything they find dangerous. Their nerves and smooth round sides make them amazingly easy to fall off of, if you don’t have a saddle. Generally people doing complicated or quick maneuvers bareback ride with one hand on the reins to guide them, and one hand gripping the horse’s mane tightly for balance.

As you might know, humans only have two hands. This setup leaves no hands free for anything like weapons; if you want to do anything else, you have to sacrifice either steering or stability. Before the stirrup was invented, horses were mostly used in warfare to pull chariots, or as moving platforms from which warriors could throw themselves before joining the fight.

But cast your eyes back to that horse up above. That horse has stirrups. The stirrup is the little square hanging below its tummy, hanging by a line to the saddle. The saddle is held stable by a strap around the horse’s midsection, so by putting their feet into stirrups on either side, the rider is able to stay much more balanced and steady. And now? They can ride with one hand free. They can even have both hands free for short periods of time. They can hold weapons and get close to their enemies.

Over the last century horses have almost completely disappeared from military and civilian life, except as quaint curiosities. It’s easy to lose sight of how absolutely pivotal they were to warfare, for millennia. The thing that’s replaced them, the modern “cavalry”, are tanks and helicopters. And the core mythos of European aristocracy is that they’re the descendants of old and mighty mounted warriors. Cavaliers. Chevaliers. Caballeros.

(Cowboys are misnamed. They oughta be horseboys.)

And stirrups have a fatal flaw. (CN: Grievous injury. Horse people, you know what’s coming; take a deep breath.)

If you fall off your horse, your horse will probably be startled (if it wasn’t already startled before you fell off) and want to run away from the thing that startled them (you).

If you fall off your horse and your foot stays in the stirrup, the horse will want to run away from you–so it will drag you after it.

If you are fortunate, you will stay to the side of your horse’s back legs, and your foot will come free or your horse will be stopped quickly. If you are not fortunate–let’s say, the stirrup is around your ankle, so your foot and heel are essentially anchoring you in place–your torso or head will end up under the very solid hooves of a thousand-pound animal as it panics and tries to escape you, and it is quite possible that you will be dead before your horse gets tired of running.

Being “caught up” or “hung up” in a stirrup doesn’t always result in death, spinal injury, broken bones, or other grievous bodily harm, especially when riders wear head and torso protection. But... I found an illustration of the phenomenon because it’s a picture of a person who died 700 years ago, not 30 or 20 or 10.

Also because looking at photographs of people caught up in stirrups makes my gut churn, because I used to be a horseperson so I’ve seen that shit live. Watching it happen feels shitty and helpless, and if you’re not already on the ground near the horse and able to catch it, there’s almost nothing you can do.

And so, therefore, you are now equipped to understand just how valuable it would be to have a shoe that stopped your foot from getting stuck in your stirrups, even if it forces you to walk funny when you dismount.

This 15th century Persian picture demonstrates just what’s going on: The stirrup rests on the forward part of the foot, and the heel prevents it from sliding any further back. That fatal anchoring is way less likely to happen.

Now that we’re all appropriately somber and appreciative of this shoe’s full context, I feel that we’re ready to behold what seems to be that same aquamarine shoe (or its mate) as a boot, which you could walk down any Parisian runway today in and look completely avant-garde.

Isn’t it glorious?

The military stiletto was not a long-lived fad, either in Europe or Asia. I would wildly conjecture that this had to do with the increasing use of cannons and firearms on the battlefield. They could punch through the heaviest armour from a long way away, and people sitting on horses are very visible targets, so cavalry soldiers had to focus on their ability to fight on foot if unhorsed. This is also why the period of 1500-1600 saw knights dump a great deal of their heavy plate armour.

(It’s not that you can’t fight on foot in full plate armour, it’s just... there’s a cost/benefit thing going on between weight and protection and stamina and speed, especially if you have to, say, not be the slowest man at the back of a pack of lightly armored infantry running for your lives from an enemy with a rifle, you get me?)

Civilians, meanwhile, got hold of the high heel and never looked back.

Italy, and especially Venice, was Europe’s first point of contact for most things coming from Asia or North Africa, and what records we have say that Venice is where Europeans got on trend, in the 1580s. Venetians fell for high heels with absolute glee.

Context: Back before freedom of religion was a thing, The Catholic Church and the governments in its sphere waged a never-ending legislative battle against the sins of, uh... I’m not up on my catechism, but basically, People Thinking They Look Good, People Having Nice Things, People Getting Ideas Above Their Station, and People Being Horny. In previous centuries the battle had primarily focused on things like Absolutely Gigantic Sleeves, but in the 1500s the real hot zone in Italy became Astronomically Tall and Gorgeous Shoes, which is the subject for a future post.

So the high heel was the perfect end-run around those laws. The ball of the foot stayed close to the ground, so it wasn’t really an illegally nice shoe! It still gave that extra something, but it was easier to walk and dance in, and it made men’s calves look super nice. And anyway, with this version, there’s some kind of reasonable human limit to the height of the heels, where previous Tall Gorgeous Shoes sometimes approached the proportions of low stilts.

We get these “slap-sole” shoes because the biggest civilian concern was the high heel’s tendency to sink into mud, so they made flat platforms for the sole to rest on. The toe would be fixed in place with the heel left free, so the foot can move more normally through the gait cycle. This means the heel would lift up a bit in the air, and then hit the platform during touchdown; apparently the clacking noise it made was distinctive and carried a cachet of elegant luxury.

I honestly don’t know why Louis XIV decided that chunky heels were the way to go. My only working theory is maybe... they made better ballet shoes? I’m not joking; the man was an avid ballet dancer, and danced at every opportunity he got. Maybe chunky heels are less likely to wear out, break, or come apart than smaller ones. But that’s still only a theory.

In conclusion: God, humans are so fucking weird. I love us.

Further Reading:

Bata Shoe Museum - Standing TALL: The Curious History of Men in Heels

Bata Shoe Museum - The Height of Fashion: Conservation of a Pair of 17th Century Slap Sole Shoes

Shoes: A History from Sandals to Sneakers, edited by Giorgio Riello and Peter McNeil. Book; 2006. It’s massively huge and heavy and also full of scholarly research and not just a glorified Pinterest board, which is more than I can say for everything else I checked out of the library.

#it's shoetime baby #if i infuriate pedantic equestrians or bibliography formatters oh well #I really don't care

1K notes · View notes

l0ganberry · 3 months

Text

I have no idea where all of you came from but here's the colored version of my drawing of Husk.

26 notes · View notes

ifihadaworldofmyown · 3 months

Text

mfw I learned that Tumblr Live is shutting down on January 24, 2024.

#alice in wonderland #disney #1951 #tumblr live #i really don't care #no one will miss it

18 notes · View notes

alphabetboyluvr · 2 months

Note

I read your work on Wattpad and I totally love you, but what I don’t like is the way you focus on read to vote ratios. You are literally the only author I know (and I follow hundreds of authors, some that could rival you) and you are the only one that cares about read to vote ratios.

I think it’s something you shouldn’t worry about because the read count isn’t even accurate because it also includes when the author reads the chapter themselves even while editing.

I know votes are important to authors, but to most readers (because I’ve asked some friends I’ve made on Wattpad) we don’t even look at how many votes a book has to make us want to read the story. We look at the description and how many views it’s gotten, not the votes, because we know votes aren’t a good representation of how good a book is because people can forget to vote or just don’t give out votes no matter how good the story is.

Your books have millions of views (regardless if some are proper views or not) and your books are always out there and they get discovered, and I think you’re a bit greedy with asking for votes- especially when you do those god awful vote goals in order to get a chapter out.

I’ve seen other authors do vote goals, and it makes me want to do the total opposite and not vote because you should be writing and releasing chapters for the fun of it because you like writing and want to update, not for the votes.

I love you and your writing, but I’d say the whole voting ratio thing is a flawed concern and does leave a few readers bitter with you. I know you probably don’t care, but I just had to say it as I saw your insta where you mentioned the vote ratio and it irked me coz like I said, you’re the only author that cares about it when you shouldn’t worry about it considering your thousands of followers and your millions of views

okay, a lot to discuss with this one!

so, firstly thank you for sharing your thoughts - discussion is always welcome, even if we have different views on the subject! and thank you for the kind words about my work, too!!

i will just say that pretty much all the fic writers i know on a personal level do, to some extent, care about the engagement on their stories. whether it be wattpad, tumblr or ao3, engagement is hugely appreciated for a number of reasons.

i know of a good handful of writers, large and small, who use vote goals - even if they don't outwardly state it, they care about the ratio. they wouldn't do the goal if not. that's what it's for.

i think it's also important to note that i don't do vote goals anymore and haven't done for quite some time. i tried them for a while, didn't like them, no longer do them - because i agree that they felt insincere and icky.

i don't hold my chapters to ransom - i think there's one instance in my 11 (!!) years on wattpad, and 5 years of writing for the tannies that I've delayed an update because a vote goal hadn't been met.

but like you say, views aren't an accurate way of measuring engagement. votes are.

to me, a vote is a considered effort that readers will make to say 'yeah, i liked this', without needing to comment or interact on a big level. asking for people who read hours worth of your hard work for free to simply press a little star at the end of a chapter isn't a greedy ask, in my opinion.

so why do i care about the ratio?

because when i used to look for stories as a reader, it was something i glanced at to see if the views aligned with the quality. a good ratio indicates good writing. it's as simple as that.

on a personal level - i don't actually care. it's not like i sit up at night thinking about it, or obsessively check my stats. i post chapters, read the comments, and that's about it. the vote ratio can be seen at a glance, and even though I'm bad at maths, it's an easy thing to compute lol.

this is the back end of bad decisions. none of the numbers make any sense, really. i'd go mad if i tried to figure it all out. so please don't think I'm sitting here obsessing over the numbers, because I'm not. i wouldn't be able to write if i was.

what i do care about is what you guys think of me. of course i care. i like to think i have a pretty good relationship with my readers, and so it does suck to know that something like this, which you agree is trivial, is enough to make you bitter with me.

i consider myself very lucky when it comes to my readers, but I've also worked damn hard to cultivate my readership. those millions of reads didn't come about just by chance.

it's kind of insulting when you see how much work i put in and know how much i love writing these stories to then be told that i only care about votes. bd alone is the length of 4 standard-sized novels, published for free, written on my own time. you don't do that if you don't write for enjoyment.

so if you think I'm being greedy - when we both know in the grand scheme of things votes mean nothing and will earn me nothing more than a metaphorical pat on the back - then fine, but it's not like you aren't getting fed, either.

vote, or don't vote. it's all just pixels on a screen, at the end of the day.

but please don't insinuate i don't care about my stories.

#ask #some thoughts!#im also a capricorn so to expect me not to care about outward measures of success is like trying to get blood from a stone #you'll never see me mention kudos #or notes #i really don't care #votes on wattpad are my one vice #im only human

13 notes · View notes

sekaicards · 13 days

Note

previous anon doesn't have the right to say that until they run their own tournament blog. you have a life outside tumblr and we're just happy you're back. ignore them.

i genuinely wonder about anons like that sometimes. they do know that they can just unfollow right. no one is making you stick around. there is no being held at gunpoint to follow a blog.

#mod post!#asks!#besides. you guys can all go make your own version of this tournament if you don't enjoy how i run it #i really don't care #go. be free

12 notes · View notes

torifuckingspring · 4 months

Text

people who give a fuck about sports games in school are my least favorite kind of people and i'm their least favorite kind of person

#tis a mutual hatred #i mean who cares #does this affect your life in any way #and you know what #you can give a fuck about it #whatever #i really don't care #just don't take it out on the suicidal trans guy who's stuck in the girls gym class #jesus christ man

11 notes · View notes

m-u-n-c-h-y · 1 year

Text

Normally, I don't bother feeding into these posts, and this is clearly troll bait, but this has to be one of the WORST "hot" take I have ever seen coming from the Fallout community.

Do I have to take the word "gaslight", put it in a little box, and place it on a high self where you can't reach until you can be responsible enough to actually use it? Do you even know what gaslighting means???

Here's a hint:

When has Preston done ANY OF THIS????

Show me the transcripts please. Point to me where exactly he says the Minutemen are more important than finding your son? Otherwise, I'm gonna have to measure your arms cause this is reaching.

By your logic, all the companions have "gaslit" the player into joining their causes rather than finding your son and avenging your spouse. Why? Because you don't get to mention your family all that much. The only companion that you openly talk about this with is Nick Valentine, and that's because YOU HIRED HIM TO HELP YOU FIND YOUR KID. IT'S HIS JOB.

Bethesda did a lot of fuck ups when it came to the writing, but at least be consistent with your hatred. If you’re gonna make an accusation like this, you better ante up and slap it on all the offenders, not just one.

Don't blame your poor interpretation and analysis skills on the character themselves for... [checks notes] "Asking you to help people in need."

Like I get not liking Preston, I get that he sort of strong-arms you into becoming the General and all that, and I get that you don't like doing Minutemen radiant quests, but you can just... not like him.

You can just dislike a character. You don't have to make shit up or outright lie to justify it. Hell, you don't even have to tell us your reasoning for doing so. And you can certainly choose not blast your piss poor, and blatantly false justification for the wider internet to see. Come on now.

#Preston Garvey #this 'hot' take is... a trip #it's more like burnt toast take than a 'hot' take #also I did see your tags #and tbh #i really don't care #so you find him boring #that's a much better reason than claiming he 'gaslit' you #wtf???#I feel like Inigo Montoya #'You keep using that word. I don't think that word means what you think it means.'#Got the Munchy's?#fallout 4 #fo4 #rant rant rant #my 'hot' take is that people who make these kinds of claims are stupid

77 notes · View notes