British tax dollars at work:
High Heels Give Women More Attractive Gait
Up next, a covariate study for which they need research volunteers - does tanning make women more attractive? And why bikinis? Hit the beach!
« How To Lose A Country In Ten Years | Main | Coin Out, IOUs In »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e2017d3fbb1e12970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference This Just In, And Thank Heaven For Science:
The comments to this entry are closed.
Scientists worth their salt know that brown fat looks better than white fat.
Posted by: Clarice | January 10, 2013 at 11:31 AM
Mmmmm. Especially young Alabamians.
Posted by: Brent Musburger | January 10, 2013 at 11:33 AM
Heck, why does Hillary! or Moochelle wear Omar's signature tents? I doubt their gaits would be improved by high heels, tans, bikinis or anything else.
Posted by: henry | January 10, 2013 at 11:34 AM
Posted by: Andrew Sullivan | January 10, 2013 at 11:38 AM
What makes you think AndyPandy doesn't dress up his bear of a husband in high heels and bikini?
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 11:41 AM
shit, they had to do a study on this? How much did that cost?
They could have watched any film done by most of the 1930's, 40's and 50's hotties and figured that out.
Heels shape the legs and rear end in a manner that is much more attractive to the western male. And the rolling of the hips is a primary sexual attractant. It's like saying "hey! Look at my hips! I am worthy of your attraction!"
Posted by: matt | January 10, 2013 at 11:43 AM
So, ESPN has to apologize for Brent Musberger, without research funding and a crosstabbed study, observing that a beauty queen looks good and the quarterbacks tend to score with the babes. That apparently is un-PC. But it is OK to spend money on studies indicating that the male mind is more focused on women walking in high heels than in flats. Sign of the Apocalypse!
Next up: Careful study concluding that El Paso males' hearts beat faster when attached to a body being given a lap dance by an El Paso stripper than when attached to a body listening to a tape on the use of Talcott Parsons' pattern variable in high heel studies.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM
matt@11:43-- I'm speechless...
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 11:44 AM
Next thing you know the sociologists will be claiming that, after a million dollar two year long study, they have concluded that females' hearts beat faster watching Chippendale dancers dance than watching Barney Frank give a talk on banking regulations.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 11:49 AM
That was my first thought too, matt. But then I remembered footbinding in cultures where women's traditional clothing does not reveal the legs. The footbinding would cause the shorter steps (although not much of the hip movement) and so maybe the authors are onto something with that.
High heels also make your feet look smaller, too - and footbinding makes your feet actually smaller.
Still falls in the dumb expensive study file, though. At least the Brits paid for it and not us.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 10, 2013 at 11:50 AM
NK speechless? Matt, "you've done a man's job", as the movie line goes.
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | January 10, 2013 at 11:51 AM
they have concluded that females' hearts beat faster watching Chippendale dancers dance than watching Barney Frank give a talk on banking regulations.
This female's heart beats faster watching Barney Frank than it does Chippendales, TC, but not out of attraction - out of fear and anger.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 10, 2013 at 11:52 AM
Speechless? I'm very shallow- I never studied the ergonomics of high heels. I only know what I like-- not why I like it.
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 11:55 AM
This study looks like a candidate for one of Taranto's "Lonely Lives of Scientists" features.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 10, 2013 at 12:00 PM
Foot binding was also performed as an act of control in ancient China. Women's feet were severely deformed and they literally were barely able to move. This reinforced the nature of women as chattel.
The Japanese were marginally more humane with geta, the sandal men and women wore. Not real conducive to ballroom dancing, though.Still don't know how they did all that swordplay in wooden flip flops. Clunk, clunk...chop!
Posted by: matt | January 10, 2013 at 12:01 PM
I remember seeing old videos of the Burlie Q with vamps rolling their hips, porch. The reactions were pretty well documented.
Posted by: matt | January 10, 2013 at 12:02 PM
That's me. Wearing heels.
You should see my gait.
[TheVIMH: What in the......?!?!!!?]
Yeah, don't ask.
Posted by: hit and run | January 10, 2013 at 12:03 PM
The real scandal may well be who paid for this study. Odds are, it was you and I ...
Posted by: GMax | January 10, 2013 at 12:05 PM
'Goggles they do nothin' hit, the obvious pic from the last few days comes to mind, so I'll pick another in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM
"But then I remembered footbinding in cultures where women's traditional clothing does not reveal the legs."
I voted for Obama because Mitt Romney demanded that women be put in binders.
Posted by: Julia | January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM
Ms. Webb in heels-- LIKE
Hit&Run in heels-- NO LIKE
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 12:22 PM
Good point, Porchlight. My predicted result didn't take into account the "I Can't Believe This Idiot Prog Is Saying This!" anger factor and the "How Are the Progs Going to Use This to Pick My Pocket?" fear factor!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 12:31 PM
Mooch has a gait like a hobbled mule
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 10, 2013 at 12:38 PM
TC, on the other thread where you mentioned Rex Trailer,I thanked you for the link.
Re: high heels...how many of you JOM ladies can wear them? Not me! My feet can only wear L.L. Bean boots in the winter and flip flops in the summer!
Posted by: marlene | January 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM
The previous thread is simply to sad to me to comment on. Especially NK's story of the terrific young men he has personally known.
So http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/using-the-common-cores-performance-assessments-to-create-a-new-kind-of-person/ is me not only explaining how the Common Core gets us to new types of people without that being apparent, but also how education is the vehicle for personal subjugation. But listen up Kim because I also explained how CAGW is the excuse to move us back toward the historic norm of the political sovereign and cronies controlling the economy.
And CAGW cannot be contradicted by facts because like Marxism and ed theory it is a political aspiration for the future.
We really have to quit treating related methods for Transformation as if they were stand-alone, legitimate scientific theories.
Heels remind me of the Diva if she can get my mil to take her to DSW.
Posted by: rse | January 10, 2013 at 12:46 PM
Many beautiful women in high heels have shown me the gate.
Posted by: MarkO | January 10, 2013 at 12:48 PM
MarkO, just for fun I'm going to assume that " the gate" is some kind of urban slang that I won't even look up.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 10, 2013 at 12:58 PM
So, ESPN has to apologize for Brent Musberger, without research funding and a crosstabbed study, observing that a beauty queen looks good and the quarterbacks tend to score with the babes.
As much as that ambulatory liver spot irks me, the apology provided for Brent by the World's Leader in Sports Entertainment Broadcasting, for something that was moderately amusingly awkward at worst, makes you realize that Odormann wasn't an outlying point.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 10, 2013 at 12:59 PM
I noticed Webb, once, one would have to be blind not too, they do need to keep a taser around for just these sort of situation, re Musberger.
Btw, Captain, I did my review, of Middlemarch, it has it's moments, but didn't quite for me, found a more less known Eliot work, Romola, set in Renaissance Florence more to my liking,
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 01:04 PM
BREAKING: Former head of D.C. abortion group arrested in child sex sting
Posted by: Janet | January 10, 2013 at 01:04 PM
Oooooh, Janet.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 10, 2013 at 01:07 PM
OT-- the Nat Gas revolution and shale oil production in the US could be the "Next Thing" that delivers economic excitement to the USA/Canada-- economic growth, cheaper energy, massively improved current account balance of trade, stronger dollar, no new debt-- etc. It could end both the need for massive inflation and the stagnation malaise-- Barry I is trying deperately to screw it up-- here's an example of the benefits of cheap Nat Gas: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/509291/shale-gas-will-fuel-a-us-manufacturing-boom/
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 01:08 PM
That's ok, narc; we're allowed to differ on the subjective quality of fiction. I'm sure the one you prefer is very good and possibly an overlooked masterpiece.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 10, 2013 at 01:11 PM
This is funny -
h/t matt sharing on FB
Posted by: Janet | January 10, 2013 at 01:13 PM
School shooting in Taft CA - no one will ever make the connection between the strictest gun laws and school gun shootings.
Marlene, that's pretty much it for me too, except I'm bringing heels on my business trip to FL next week. I hope I don't tip over and break my neck.
Posted by: Jane: Mock the Media | January 10, 2013 at 01:17 PM
Scott Richard Swirling, 61, thought he was discussing plans to meet a District man who was offering to let him have sex with his preteen daughter, authorities said.
So here is my question. Is it normal for men to find other men who give up their daughters for sex? Is there a trade for that? Because it seems like even a moron would think that was a sting.
I assume there will no press whatsoever on this.
Posted by: Jane: Mock the Media | January 10, 2013 at 01:19 PM
Obama IS the Messiah!!! He is going to resurrect Hostess Cupcakes on the nation's currency!!!
(Somewhere there's a DingDong joke in there...)
Posted by: cathyf | January 10, 2013 at 01:26 PM
Thanks, marlene. I just checked your post and saw that you spent time in southern NH, so you were able to watch Rex on a Boston station (I beleive it was WBZ).
Meanwhile, I just checked the intertubes and found that Salty Brine passed away almost a decade ago.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 01:28 PM
Don't worry, Jane. You'll man-kill them in flats (even the prog males).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 01:29 PM
Ha - I knew that signature reminded me of something.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 10, 2013 at 01:31 PM
here is some basic research on high heels done back in the 1950's. LUN
Posted by: matt | January 10, 2013 at 01:33 PM
Is it normal for men to find other men who give up their daughters for sex? Is there a trade for that?
Normal? No way. It does exist among some sickos with the majority being step-fathers. I'm still wondering if the Second Mile investigation is going to end at Penn State because I've read some disturbing things indicating it was the tip of the iceberg and much more widespread.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 10, 2013 at 01:35 PM
I bow to Iggy, the expert on heifer haunches . . . and on women, too.
Posted by: sbw | January 10, 2013 at 01:43 PM
NK, I wrote about that on my now disappeared blog. The petrochemical industry is huge and is significantly more value add than exporting raws. SABIC in Saudi Arabia has been a dominant player globally in plastics and other raw materials for industry.
This could then leapfrog other industries, and with China becoming less competitive could help make North American manufacturing more attractive. The cumulative effect could be spectacular.
Or the feds could screw it all up.
Posted by: matt | January 10, 2013 at 01:44 PM
TC and Jane...were Drake's cupcakes(with the swirl) bought by Hostess? I think Drake's,with the duck on the package advertised on Rex Trailer's show.
NH only had one TV station,so we watched Boston stations.One of my scariest childhood memories was listening to the Boston news reports about the Boston Strangler.
Posted by: marlene | January 10, 2013 at 01:48 PM
Matt-- couldn't agree more-- I've encouraged my son to focus his 2013 post college job search in Midwest/Plains state PetroChem and energy production-transport businesses. He loves the auto industry-- we'll see.
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 01:51 PM
Obama is letting Geithner and Lew talk - which seems odd, but only after he takes credit for being the savoir of all things economic in the US in his first term.
Marlene I found out something recently about the Boston strangler. I wish I could remember what it was.
Posted by: Jane: Mock the Media | January 10, 2013 at 01:52 PM
Jack Lew-- this is a temperate analysis of Lew the government official-- he's an enemy of the taxpayer and patriots who want a strong nation to hand off to future generations: http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/10/jack-lew-defender-of-entitlements-archit
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 01:58 PM
Wearing high heels doesn't do much for me in terms of my gait.
Because, you know, I'm like totally on a bike.
But still, that's how I roll.
Posted by: HCOAB | January 10, 2013 at 02:05 PM
--High Heels Give Women More Attractive Gait--
There's a reason Sherlock Holmes was a Brit.
You can't get nuttin past those limeys.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 10, 2013 at 02:12 PM
--High Heels Give Women More Attractive Gait--
Women only? Celebrate diversity you JOM savages;

Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 10, 2013 at 02:15 PM
IG-- JUST.... DON'T....EVER.... DO... THAT... AGAIN.....EVAH.... I'M BEGGING HERE
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 02:19 PM
Ugh!
A friend of yours Iggy?
Posted by: Jane: Mock the Media | January 10, 2013 at 02:24 PM
I don't know how accurate this is, because it's Trumpp being quoted by Page 6, in the Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260166/Miss-Alabama-Katherine-Webb-changes-number-getting-thousands-calls.html
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 02:26 PM
Heels shape the legs and rear end in a manner that is much more attractive to the western male.
I disagree. Those factors remain the same and that theory was disproven in Block (1989) and Block and Girard (1990). The real difference is around the calf, heel, and instep. It is subtle and excruciatingly delightful. In essence, the lower leg's beauty is accentuated. You can read about this in my 1994 article in Journal of Female Leggery, my 2001 article in Leg and my 2004 article in Southern Journal of Leg Men Studies (though I admit the first journal really isn't such a well-regarded one in the field.) Really, really proud of the Leg article which got me tenure.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | January 10, 2013 at 02:27 PM
Posted by: hit and run | January 10, 2013 at 02:28 PM
Posted by: cathyf | January 10, 2013 at 02:29 PM
http://allthingsd.com/20130110/big-blue-is-still-the-big-dog-of-patents/?mod=mailchimp is for henry.
Posted by: rse | January 10, 2013 at 02:29 PM
Hit-- as a man who posted a photo of themselves wearing high heels, I think you should have let that one lie...
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 02:31 PM
Oh, narciso, I'm so happy you like G. Eliot's Romola! I hesitated to recommend it to anyone before, because it's so ... different than her other work, in part because it seems so much less filtered - more immediate and personal, the 15c Florence setting notwithstanding. I don't actually know anyone else who has read it.
Posted by: AliceH | January 10, 2013 at 02:35 PM
My mom really likes Romola. She was just telling me something about it over Thanksgiving but darned if I forgot.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 10, 2013 at 02:37 PM
Trivia: the actress who starred as Gwendolen Harleth in the BBC production of another Eliot nove, Daniel Deronda, is named Romola Garai.
Pretty good production, too.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 10, 2013 at 02:39 PM
I liked Daniel Deronda better than Middlemarch, fwiw.
It's been so many years since I've read any of them, and frankly my memory just isn't what it used to be (though it does show signs of slight recovery lately). Yay - I look forward to reading them all again! And maybe this time I can make it through Felix Holt -- three tries so far, no traction. 4s a charm?
Posted by: AliceH | January 10, 2013 at 02:46 PM
It's a lesser known work, which according to the preface, some like Leslie Stephens, who have faded over time, though it inauthentic, but it is an interesting exercise,
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 02:47 PM
Death by Lap Dance, Inc.
Near-death experiences on request. Sign up early and ask for a senior discount.
Posted by: Frau Todestanz | January 10, 2013 at 02:51 PM
Eeew, Iggy!
Thank you all so much for the birthday wishes. Jane is so on top of things. It is hard to keep up with the threads during ski season.
On topic, my mom wore high heels even for housework in the 50s. For comfort, she claimed.
Still on the topic of shoes, I snapped these pics at the ski area on Monday. I need a comment from daddy. These men in roomy overcoats, pointy hats, thin pants and bedroom slippers in the snow looked bizarre. They were photographing and posing with American children in ski school.
Chinese?
Posted by: caro | January 10, 2013 at 02:52 PM
Thanks for the link rse. Key point is "write everything down". Not stated, have thousands of patent attorneys on hand to sift through what you write down -- note that the patent law now favors first to file (ie whomever has the most patent attorneys).
Posted by: henry | January 10, 2013 at 02:52 PM
OT, that was an even more quizzical Academy Awards nominee presentation,
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 02:52 PM
Iggy, I take back what I said about deferring to your expertise.
Posted by: sbw | January 10, 2013 at 03:03 PM
What makes you think AndyPandy doesn't dress up his bear of a husband in high heels and bikini?
The heels might bring back an unwanted memory of Sarah Palin and how she made *it* move.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 10, 2013 at 03:04 PM
caro, that one guy likes a LOT of starch in his pants, apparently. LOL
Posted by: fdcol63 | January 10, 2013 at 03:06 PM
henry-isn't it also nifty how big blue is working so hard to change the nature of education globally so that future innovation is lesslikely? You'd think they had a vested interest in the status quo or something.
Posted by: rse | January 10, 2013 at 03:08 PM
Marlene, at one point Hostess did own Drake's products. I don't know if they still do (or, for that matter, what the status is of the US company that owns Hostess; is anyone keeping up with that saga?). Except for Twinkies, I actually wasn't a big fan of those pastry products. I lived on Del's Frozen Lemonade. Did Del's ever make it up to northern New England? In the Providence area, it was the best frozen lemonade.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 03:08 PM
CH-- well-- I think Ig above has found photo evidence of AndyPandy's husband in heels and bikini.
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 03:09 PM
caro, happy birthday!
Those beings look like extraterrestrials to me although Howard Hughes looked weird in his final years.
Posted by: Frau Todestanz | January 10, 2013 at 03:10 PM
Shouldn't there be a senior premium, Frau, on the theory that it may be more difficult to . . . say . . . rev up the senior?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 03:12 PM
Rocket surgery in progress, although even the dim realization still shows he is clueless,
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/10/nbc-say-this-2nd-term-transition-has-really-been-an-unforced-error-huh/
On that note, it's remarkable that the analyst
identified as 'Maya' in the film, has not been promoted.
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 03:12 PM
Well rse, the last time innovation happened outside big blue's doors people there had to work for a living for a couple decades -- much more fun to spend their time playing golf.
Posted by: henry | January 10, 2013 at 03:14 PM
For the rest of you in real America-- here's a taste of what passes for political office holder policy discussion in Blue Hell suburban Ct.-- although several commenters do redeem sanity: http://darien.patch.com/articles/darien-officials-considering-gun-buyback-program#comments_list
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 03:15 PM
Visited any "rest homes" lately, TC? Some of those seniors can get around at night even on all fours. I have it from a nurse who had to round them up on her night shift. Having a senior moment can take on a Clintonian meaning.
Posted by: Frau Todestanz | January 10, 2013 at 03:16 PM
It's been so many years since I've read any of them, and frankly my memory just isn't what it used to be
Same here. But then that's the great thing about having a poor memory - when you reread books, it's like reading them for the first time!
Posted by: Porchlight | January 10, 2013 at 03:18 PM
Well that is true, henry, IBM and Xerox, are no longer the innovators, Jobs, and Gates, and Andreesen, and Ellison, outpaced them within a generation, or two,
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 03:21 PM
I guess with those "performance enhancers", Frau, even the most senior of the seniors can be "responsive" to a lap dance, whether or not it is ultimately fatal.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 10, 2013 at 03:21 PM
Just some more evidence of the Left/Dems doing their worst to derail America's NatGas potential-- LNG exports:http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/10/by-all-means-lets-hold-up-this-natural-gas-export-study-a-little-more/
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 03:25 PM
When I started teaching in the pre-cambrian period, we had to wear stockings with our high heels and "proper foundation garments." I could jump rope, play a mean game of 4-square and run like the dickens to stop kiddies from playing with the rogue gophers out beyond the asphalt.
Posted by: Frau Hohehacken | January 10, 2013 at 03:28 PM
narciso, IBM does plenty of innovation these days. The other guys have the mindshare and marketing talent.
Posted by: henry | January 10, 2013 at 03:35 PM
Yes, I know at least a couple very smart people doing unpublicized cutting edge stuff for Big Blew.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 10, 2013 at 03:40 PM
I have my own account at Christian Louboutin. I could have saved them a lot of effort from just the pics on my iPhone. Maybe I can be a consultant for the follow-up study. Please!
Posted by: Beasts of England | January 10, 2013 at 03:41 PM
Well I stand corrected, I'm just looking this as an outside observer, Of course, this fellow would miss that Rove has his own interest in promoting this view, or maybe he does know;
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/01/10/who-wins-a-gop-civil-war-the-democrats-do/?cxntfid=blogs_jay_bookman_blog
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 03:45 PM
TC,Del's lemonade doesn't sound familiar. My Mom baked sweets every day,so we didn't eat the Twinkies,etc. This sounds like a cliche,but she greeted us after school with cookies and milk.
Posted by: marlene | January 10, 2013 at 03:48 PM
Ig@2:15 - That's my second cringe of 2013! And much more devastating than the Kathy Griffin photo. I'm gonna have to carefully review my private stock of photos in order to compensate...
Posted by: Beasts of England | January 10, 2013 at 03:51 PM
Marlene, that was my mom, too. She did it in high heels.
Posted by: caro | January 10, 2013 at 03:57 PM
Back on topic...
Louis XIV knew how to pick out his dress shoes
WTF Art History:
Posted by: Frau Hohehacken | January 10, 2013 at 04:00 PM
jim ryan;
my empirical experience differs. While I admire a well turned heel and firm calf and hamstrings as much as any man, I find it is the holistic effect of wearing high heels that results in a certain je n'est ce quoi that is hard to resist.
That and "does this make my butt look bigger?" when being drug to the shoe department the few times I could not avoid it.
Posted by: matt | January 10, 2013 at 04:04 PM
Frau-
Peter the Great needed no heels.

Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 10, 2013 at 04:10 PM
Way, Way bigger than I thought.
And they have heels, for a big Tzar like him too.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 10, 2013 at 04:11 PM
More reviews of Jack Lew-- he will never agree to spending/entitlement cuts. That is the universal evaluation. My take-- that makes him an enemy of taxpayers and patriots: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100367675
Posted by: NK | January 10, 2013 at 04:13 PM
Well it is the combination, no doubt, matt, although I don't know what variable they used to represent that, for research purposes of course.
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 04:18 PM
Obviously a fibonacci variable narciso.
Posted by: henry | January 10, 2013 at 04:25 PM
Clearly, henry, the high heel is a multiplier effect
Posted by: narciso | January 10, 2013 at 04:33 PM